DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site

General => Political and Religious Forum (aka the echo chamber) => Topic started by: jammindude on June 06, 2014, 05:33:03 PM

Title: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 06, 2014, 05:33:03 PM
Not sure how many of you heard about the shootings at Seattle Pacific University yesterday.   A gunman opened fire with shotgun and killed one and injured four.   A student managed to wrestle him to the ground while he was re-loading. 

But *THIS* was the quote that absolutely killed me and I wanted to get everyone's thoughts on it.   

"The 26-year-old gunman, Aaron Ybarra, was obsessed with the Columbine High School shootings and had even traveled to the Colorado site where two student gunmen killed 15 and injured another 21 fellow students in April 1999, police sources told KIRO 7."

So this guy became obsessed with the Columbine massacre and WANTED to shoot up a school. 

Do you think the media spectacle is causing a perpetuation of the problem?  If so, do you think it can be stopped?   People talk about how they want the media to stop giving these guys attention...but it doesn't seem like you could ever put it to a stop without infringing on freedom of the press.    And it just doesn't seem realistic that everyone will just volunteer to not report on a shooting and "name names".   

I guess I just don't get it.   There are people who still make a hero out of Charles Manson...but for some reason, people don't imitate him.    (well, they do try to imitate the influence he had on his followers...but no one since has imitated what he got them to do)     Why are so many whack jobs obsessed with imitating shooters above any other copy cat crime?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 06, 2014, 06:01:05 PM
Well, there's no doubt that the media coverage influences these guys, but I don't think it causes, or even encourages them beyond what they already are. This knuckehead had issues, and Columbine is something that he focused them on; could have been plenty of other not-so-great events. By and large, everybody who does this sort of thing has their own reasons: social outcasts, pissed off at the US Army, desperately wants to pork Jodie Foster, desperately wants to pork anybody, just all around, good ole fashioned misanthropy, plenty of reasons. Aside from maybe providing some useful tips, the acts that came before them probably had little to do with the actual occurrences that follow.

On a different note about the media coverage of these things, we're seeing an oddball one right now. At the same time this was happening some maniac hoser went on a kill crazy rampage and shot 5 cops, forcing a whole neighborhood into lockdown for a couple of days. I realize that Americans care more about themselves than our slow-talking neighbors to the North, but surely this deserves some decent coverage. Can't help but think maybe there's a message here that they'd just as soon not bring up.

And just as an aside, for all of the possible reasons to run amok, thinking it might get you into the pants of a 19 year old Joide Foster might just top the list. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 06, 2014, 06:55:52 PM
Well, there's no doubt that the media coverage influences these guys, but I don't think it causes, or even encourages them beyond what they already are. 

I tend to agree.  My opinion is based on nothing more than my own "think-so," but the way I see it, seeing coverage of that type of thing does not cause someone to want to do it.  BUT that being said, I think that if someone is already messed up enough to want to do it, seeing coverage enables them and makes them realize they can actually pull it off.  I dunno.  At least, that makes sense to me.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lordxizor on June 06, 2014, 07:22:20 PM
I think it gives them the specific idea of shooting up a school to vent their rage, but they probably would have found another way to vent it if it hadn't been a school.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 06, 2014, 08:22:46 PM
It just seems to me that this isn't just a guy who went, "Hey, that's sounds like a good idea"   This is a guy who heard about it, and loved the idea so much that he became obsessed by it.   

I'll go a step further.   It wasn't just the school shooting....it was actually *the attention it got* that became the catalyst.   He didn't fall in love with the idea of Colombine or simply shooting up a school...it is the MEDIA STORM that people like this crave.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 06, 2014, 09:44:11 PM
The media needs to stop mentioning the names of these people and plastering their faces all over TV in the days that follow such tragedies. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 06, 2014, 09:56:07 PM
The media needs to stop mentioning the names of these people and plastering their faces all over TV in the days that follow such tragedies.

Not to sound too terribly cynical but...  Yeah...good luck with that.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 06, 2014, 10:43:01 PM
The media needs to stop mentioning the names of these people and plastering their faces all over TV in the days that follow such tragedies.
I don't think names and faces matter much. The majority of these guys are known by the location of their rampage. And the only time their faces are memorable is if there's something really wrong with them. Baylock, crazy dude from Arizona and the Joker dude come to mind. How many other ones would you recognize if shown a picture?

These guys ring a bell?
(https://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120219154011/criminalminds/images/e/ef/GeorgeHennard.jpg)
(https://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120711224110/criminalminds/images/1/14/Huberty.jpg)
They killed 23 and 21, ranking both of them in the top 5. People would recognize #1 since he's quite noticeably Korean, and #2 because he's the villain from a Star Trek episode. Numbers 2 and 4 here are Hennard and Huberty. I only knew one of them by name, although I'm certainly familiar with the other guy's handiwork due to it's spectacular conclusion.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 07, 2014, 09:44:03 AM
 Shootings in Seattle... Same shit different day.
Moral fiber isn't what it once was, and it shows on all levels.

Whatever happened to Davey and Goliath, after school specials that had moral message, hokey sitcoms that promoted family.

It all seems corny but things weren't fucking nuts like they are now.

Bunch of lunatics with mental disorders killing people on a daily basis. There has to be a reason better than..."its because they are able to get guns!"

If it were only that simple.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 07, 2014, 09:49:07 AM
The media needs to stop mentioning the names of these people and plastering their faces all over TV in the days that follow such tragedies.

Not to sound too terribly cynical but...  Yeah...good luck with that.

Sadly, I know it is just a pipe dream. >:(
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: The King in Crimson on June 07, 2014, 12:44:25 PM
I think it's terribly simplistic to blame these shootings on one thing, whether that thing is prevalence and easy access to guns, lack of religion, lack of morals, the media, or even videogames.  These things may all contribute or exacerbate these massacres, but to fully blame them just seems too... easy. It's easy to blame TV or videogames for promoting violence because it makes the solution easy. It's also easy to say that guns are the cause because if we just had less of them, then things would be better. Same for the media. If the media would just stop reporting this, things would be better! Simple solutions to simple problems impact our lives much less than complex solutions to complex problems and they make us feel better about promoting the solutions. Complex solutions, on the other hand, require a greater commitment and if there's anything that Americans hate it's having their lives adversely affected by... anything. Gas prices too high? Invest in new technologies that will eventually, hopefully payoff and reduce our dependence on a rapidly dwindling resource but will require a vast overhaul of our infrastructure and maybe a change in how we go about our lives? Or how about invest even MORE money in said rapidly dwindling resource and kick the can down the road even further? Whatever affects Joe Blow American the least RIGHT NOW is the best for America because fuck the future.

So, if there's anything that I think these massacres have told us about ourselves it's that it's our culture and society that breeds violent misanthropes prone to public massacres. It's our growing wealth gap and inability to do anything about it lest it inconvenience a small subset of the population. It's our growing paranoia and fear of the phantasmal 'other,' whether that 'other' is a burglar, rapist, violent offender, or Muslim terrorist, all of which are seemingly just around the corner waiting for an opportunity to deprive us of our 'things' and our lives. It's a culture that fosters a growing and poisonous political divide that thrives on myopic and partisan disagreement.  Facts are not facts, just differences of opinion and ignoring the truth is not ignorance, it's 'sticking to your guns.' We are solitary islands when we succeed and mere cogs when we fail and it's not our fault, no, its the machine's.  We champion individuality when its convenient and suppress it when it's not. We can't have it both ways, but desperately we try to. Materialism and the accumulation of wealth are our barriers for success and, without them, we are societal failures, little better than leeches suckling off the hard-worked veins of the successful.

We fetishize violence and the violent but we repress one of our most base human desires and needs: sex.  Violence is the normal revolution and freedom, but sex is sin. It's dirty. It's bad. Actually our entire culture has a really weird relationship with sex. We plaster it everywhere, tits and asses and provocative headlines all over magazines, billboards, and television shows, yet we simultaneously don't want to touch it. We don't teach our children to deal with it in a normal, everyday way, we just tell them not to do it. It's bad. Meanwhile violence is glorified everywhere to such an extent that it becomes an everyday part of our lives. Grisly, mutilated corpses are dissected and analyzed in matter-of-fact ways on every episode of Bones and NCIS, but god forbid Janet Jackson shows a nipple on the Super Bowl! Will someone please think of the children?!

Then again, maybe it's the children that are to blame. Maybe it's just that our moral fiber just isn't what it used to be and children with all of their videogames, twitter accounts, championing of gay rights, and promotion of racial equality are all the cause. If only the nanny state would let us beat our children around like God intended, things would be better. Everything was so much easier back when all of our country's ills could be blamed on rock music, comic books, Communists, and the Irish. These modern days with all of their moral complexities make it so hard to find convenient and easy-to-blame scapegoats for our problems.

So (TLDR) I'd argue it's not guns or the idolatry of them that leads to these violent acts. It's not the media that glorifies violence. It's not our vastly growing divide between the wealthy and the poor. It's not our individualistic, I am an island and fuck everyone else mentality. It's not the fear or the hate or our inability and unwillingness to engage or understand that which is different from us. All of it is responsible and it's all wrapped up in that distinctly red, white and, blue bow that we call being an American. We breed violent misanthropes and in order to do anything about it, we'd need to take a good, long look at it what it means to be us. At what makes us, us. That might get in the way of American Idol or complaining about how the Republicans/Democrats are ruining America with their Fascist/Socialist policies. It's much better, much easier, to just try and bring back prayer in school or place some restrictions on guns or some other feel good, quick fix 'solution.' Because real solutions require real commitment and Americans don't have time for that. That's too hard, too... inconvenient.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 07, 2014, 01:08:24 PM
Wow, King in Crimson...that was quite a post. Still digesting it. :tup
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 07, 2014, 01:37:30 PM
I knew it. It's the fucking Irish.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 07, 2014, 01:54:05 PM
Hey wait, I'm Irish! #offendedcauseitswhateverybodythesedayslikestobe ;)

On a serious note, great post, TKIC. :tup :tup
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: The King in Crimson on June 08, 2014, 12:51:15 PM
Wow, King in Crimson...that was quite a post. Still digesting it. :tup

Hey wait, I'm Irish! #offendedcauseitswhateverybodythesedayslikestobe ;)

On a serious note, great post, TKIC. :tup :tup
Thanks.

I knew it. It's the fucking Irish.
When is it not? ;)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 08, 2014, 01:26:22 PM
This entire thread was worth it just for that one post.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: carl320 on June 08, 2014, 01:47:52 PM
This entire thread was worth it just for that one post.

This.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 09, 2014, 09:45:09 AM
This entire thread was worth it just for that one post.
Indeed.  Very nice.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: sueño on June 09, 2014, 01:28:02 PM
Beautifully said, The King   :hefdaddy
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: yeshaberto on June 09, 2014, 01:58:55 PM
Great read, king
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: j on June 09, 2014, 05:09:51 PM
Don't want to let this circle jerk get too out of control, but that was a seriously good post.

-J
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: sueño on June 09, 2014, 06:37:43 PM
But it feels so good...  :hat
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: The King in Crimson on June 09, 2014, 10:19:44 PM
When I wrote that, I guess I expected much less agreement on a post that basically boils down to "American culture is crap" and not a parade of kudos (and not the granola kind, thankfully).

Thanks guys. Now the cynical douchebag inside of me is all warm and fuzzy and endlessly confused. :)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: carl320 on June 09, 2014, 10:32:29 PM
But the sad thing is that it isn't just one thing.  It is a conglomeration of pretty much all you said, IMO.  Lack of taking responsibility, arrogance,  and the individual before the community are all important points when it comes to this.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 10, 2014, 07:17:26 AM
When I wrote that, I guess I expected much less agreement on a post that basically boils down to "American culture is crap" and not a parade of kudos (and not the granola kind, thankfully).

Thanks guys. Now the cynical douchebag inside of me is all warm and fuzzy and endlessly confused. :)

The American culture is absolutely horrid, and I fear what the state of this country is going to be when I'm 60.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 10, 2014, 08:12:21 AM
Not sure how I feel about this. The male shooter's post from Info Wars, and his girlfriend in the comment section..

https://planet.infowars.com/offbeat/the-police-to-kill-or-not-to-kill

Quote
I stand at a point in my life where I am on probation for selling marijuana.  I take urine screens frequently and I am forced to take drug classes I do not need.  Before I got arrested I had 2 jobs and was selling weed to my friends and family on the side.  Now I cannot find a job.  My probation officer states that if I protest that my probation will be violated.  They have tried to tell my fiance, who has no criminal record, that she may not own a firearm if I live in the house.  Now, i face a dire problem.  At any time the police could show up to my house and enter it for any reason at all, because, since I’m on probation aparently I dont have my 4th amendment right and neither does my fiance.  I live in Indiana and recently a law was passed named the right to resist law.  As i can make out from it, if a police officer kicks in my door and is not there legally, then I may shoot him.  But what is legal?  A warrant signed by a judge?  What if that judge however enforces unconstitutional laws?  Locks people in cages for putting a substance into their bodies.  I was arrested for a crime, that is a felony, yet i hurt no one.  Never laid a hand on a person or their property.  Was selling something on the black market that is in high demand.  Yet there is no victim in the crime i committed, so how can that be a felony charge?  A charge that takes my 1st, 2nd, and 4th right away?  How can this be?  Do I really live in a free country?  So here I sit today pondering………….
Before I go any further however, i would like to tell you a story about a friend of mine.  He got charged with a misdomenor for having a marijuana pipe on him.  He was released from jail and he was given the wrong court date.  He then had an arrest warrant out for him.  I was at his house late one night playing a video game with him.  A knock on the door came.  He opened the door and cops shoved him to the ground and came rushing in guns drawn.  several of the police officers were wearing ski masks.  2 police officers then shoved guns in my face fingers on the triggers as the rest swept the house.  They pulled his father who was asleep from his bed and dragged him into the living room.  I was ordered to lay face down on the floor as they searched me.  Finally after running my name they uncuffed me and his father and took my friend  to jail.  Before we knew what was going on it was over and I felt as if I had taken a trip back in time to nazi germany.
Now, that was my last encounter with police officers.  I’m afraid they may try to do some stuff like that to my fiance and I.  For the most part, I’m a law abiding citizen.  I believe in Gods law.  You know the ones.  Dont steal, dont murder, etc.  I fear that if they came, even with a warrant, that I feel they are being unlawfull and infringing upon my rights.  I feel that I have been violated and tread upon.  That the so called justice system has done me harm.  I do not wish to kill police.  I understand that most of them believe they are doing the right thing.  Yet, I will not go to jail, because I have not committed a crime!  I would rather die than be labeled as a criminal.  Let them call me a terrorist.  Let them label me as a fanatic, some nut job.  I know the truth, and so does God.  I’m sure our founding fathers were labeled as such.  Call me a radical, i will wear that badge with pride.  Because America is a radical idea!  Brought up upon radical thinking.  That each man has constitutional rights that are God given and cannot be taken away no matter what.  I refuse to stand by and let them dictate my life.  My family loves me, my neighbors love me.  I do good for the community, more than any cop can claim.  How can a police officer have a consience arresting people who have done nothing to harm a fellow american?  How can they sleep at night?  I wouldnt be able to.  So as i reflect, I’m being pushed further and further into a corner.  I am like a wild coyote.  You corner me, I will fight to the death.  I love America, i love the idea of it.  I am broken hearted tho to see people so pacified by materealism and obsession with hollywood stars.  It is our duty as American citizens to stand against tyranny.  To stand against corruption at all levels.  How did this happen?  That patriots like me could be resting under the boot of tyrants, and as i plead for help from my fellow americans they just walk on by.  All the while thinking, at least its not happening to me.  Yet, the sad thing is, it is happening to them.  So, do I kill cops and make a stand when they come to get me?  I would prefer to die than sit in their jail, when I have done nothing to hurt anyone.

He said this in reply to another person's comment.

Quote
I do not want to kill cops. Im not advocating doing it. I’m not going to go out and find a cop and shoot them. But, if they come to take me away, I would rather die than go to jail or a fema re-education camp when I have done nothing to hurt another human being.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 10, 2014, 09:29:27 AM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.

I'm inclined to agree that cops are asserting way too much authority here, and people are oblivious to what's going on. That doesn't change the fact that he put himself into the situation he's in.

And seriously, felony warrant service for a failure to appear on a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge? That's one seriously fucked up department and I'd be pissed off about it too. However, that's becoming the norm in this country. They're just lucky they didn't have wii controllers in their hands.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 10, 2014, 09:42:55 AM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.


I'm aware.

I have mixed feelings. I agree with basically everything he complained about, but shooting cops isn't the answer.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: sueño on June 10, 2014, 10:35:52 AM
Reynolds High School just this morning

https://koin.com/2014/06/10/shots-fired-at-troutdales-reynolds-high-school/ (https://koin.com/2014/06/10/shots-fired-at-troutdales-reynolds-high-school/)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: The King in Crimson on June 10, 2014, 10:43:22 AM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.


I'm aware.

I have mixed feelings. I agree with basically everything he complained about, but shooting cops isn't the answer.
Shooting anyone is rarely the answer. Whatever valid complaints or issues this guy may have had with the system will be drowned out by the horrific ramifications of his actions. To put it bluntly, this guy is no patriot he's just another nutjob with a propensity to solve life's problems with a gun and violence.

That said we should all take a brief moment to thank Nixon and Reagan for the glorious war on drugs and it's numerous benefits to American culture.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 10, 2014, 11:38:28 AM
That said we should all take a brief moment to thank Nixon and Reagan for the glorious war on drugs and it's numerous benefits to American culture.
I'm increasingly of the opinion that the greater problem is with the for-profit criminal justice system, and in particular the privatized prisons (which we also have St. Ronnie to thank for). The war on drugs is obviously pretty silly, but the bigger issue is cops, governments and business exploiting the holly hell out of it. Cops base their priorities a great deal on who pays money into the department. Grant money and capital forfeitures can be a helluva motivation to bust dopers. Prosecutors and judges don't get themselves elected based on their "soft on crime" approaches. Businesses that make money off of this stuff pay out tons of money to politicians for tougher laws and penalties. CCA has every reason under the sun to want the most people humanly possible put into one of their jails. Really shitty way to run a country, frankly.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 12, 2014, 07:15:11 AM
Do any other countries sell this kind of stuff?

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/12/bulletproof-blankets-body_n_5479885.html

(https://i1.huffpost.com/gen/1845420/thumbs/n-BODYGAURD-STAND-large570.jpg)
(https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1845388/thumbs/r-BODYGUARD-HALL-large570.jpg)
(https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1845427/thumbs/o-BODYGUARD-CLASS-570.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 07:57:08 AM
Do any other countries sell this kind of stuff?

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/12/bulletproof-blankets-body_n_5479885.html

(https://i1.huffpost.com/gen/1845420/thumbs/n-BODYGAURD-STAND-large570.jpg)
(https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1845388/thumbs/r-BODYGUARD-HALL-large570.jpg)
(https://i.huffpost.com/gen/1845427/thumbs/o-BODYGUARD-CLASS-570.jpg)
Sad state we are in. Every school in America needs these.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 12, 2014, 08:29:05 AM
I dunno, maybe we should think about spending $1000/kiddo on improving the quality of their education so they're actually worth a fuck, than on a halfassed attempt at insuring they're not part of the .001% that get shot by disgruntled students. Or possibly trying to fix one of the countless things far more likely to kill your student than a student run amok. How about trying to keep kids from shooting themselves, which is far, far more likely than them shooting somebody else. Seems like a better investment to me.

Christ I hate knee-jerk reactions and the exploitation of parental dread and terror.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 12, 2014, 08:47:24 AM
I remember right after Sandy Hook there was a company that started making a killing selling backpacks with a bullet-proof plate in them. I also remember after 9/11 seeing a company that was selling backpack parachutes like crazy.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Ben_Jamin on June 12, 2014, 09:20:07 AM
How many mass shootings till Obama gets his gun control?

Everytime one happens he does something about gun control. Why is he so driven about gun control?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 09:56:56 AM
I dunno, maybe we should think about spending $1000/kiddo on improving the quality of their education so they're actually worth a fuck, than on a halfassed attempt at insuring they're not part of the .001% that get shot by disgruntled students. Or possibly trying to fix one of the countless things far more likely to kill your student than a student run amok. How about trying to keep kids from shooting themselves, which is far, far more likely than them shooting somebody else. Seems like a better investment to me.

Christ I hate knee-jerk reactions and the exploitation of parental dread and terror.
Keep in mind...a father feels different than someone without children. Just sayin...
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 09:58:02 AM
How many mass shootings till Obama gets his gun control?

Everytime one happens he does something about gun control. Why is he so driven about gun control?
I guess for me its...define gun control?
What is the answer?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 12, 2014, 10:25:22 AM
Keep in mind...a father feels different than someone without children. Just sayin...
Yeah, we've already been over this, amigo, and as you're no doubt aware I'll say he feels more emotionally and less rationally about things. There are upsides and downsides to both, but in this situation you'd be better off going the rational route. Not likely, I know.

I guess for me its...define gun control?
What is the answer?
Correct. What measure of "gun control" would have prevented whichever shooting we're currently talking about?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 12, 2014, 11:08:26 AM
I dunno, maybe we should think about spending $1000/kiddo on improving the quality of their education so they're actually worth a fuck, than on a halfassed attempt at insuring they're not part of the .001% that get shot by disgruntled students. Or possibly trying to fix one of the countless things far more likely to kill your student than a student run amok. How about trying to keep kids from shooting themselves, which is far, far more likely than them shooting somebody else. Seems like a better investment to me.

Christ I hate knee-jerk reactions and the exploitation of parental dread and terror.
Keep in mind...a father feels different than someone without children. Just sayin...
I'm not sure where the objectionable part for a father is in the post that you quoted.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 11:52:06 AM
I dunno, maybe we should think about spending $1000/kiddo on improving the quality of their education so they're actually worth a fuck, than on a halfassed attempt at insuring they're not part of the .001% that get shot by disgruntled students. Or possibly trying to fix one of the countless things far more likely to kill your student than a student run amok. How about trying to keep kids from shooting themselves, which is far, far more likely than them shooting somebody else. Seems like a better investment to me.

Christ I hate knee-jerk reactions and the exploitation of parental dread and terror.
Keep in mind...a father feels different than someone without children. Just sayin...
I'm not sure where the objectionable part for a father is in the post that you quoted.
Yeah I confused my self by not reading closely enough. I thought we were talking about not spending so kids can have those bullet proof thingies.

Don't mind me... :facepalm:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 01:17:47 PM
On those shields...are kids supposed to wear them all day? I don't think the gunman's going to call to say...
 "Hey kids, time to put on yer fun time bullet shields I'm on my way!"
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 12, 2014, 01:21:59 PM
I think the plan would be to just have 30 or so in each room. When a lockdown is ordered, all the children grab one. I'm envisioning something similar to the 'get under your desk drill' they used to do when my dad was a kid. Thinking about it... why not just make bullet proof desks the children can hide under? A cold, heavy, bullet proof desk to remind the children for six hours a day that they could die at any moment.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 12, 2014, 02:43:33 PM
Hey, have they even bothered putting seat belts in school buses yet, or is that still too expensive?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 12, 2014, 03:00:38 PM
Hey, have they even bothered putting seat belts in school buses yet, or is that still too expensive?
Too expensive, AFAIK.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: JayOctavarium on June 12, 2014, 03:08:05 PM
Nah my niece's school district has belts on their buses apparently.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 12, 2014, 03:28:05 PM
Whelp, looks like the NHTSA has sound reasons for advising against seatbelts in school-buses, so I withdraw my sarcastic indignation. (Thousand dollar bullet proof blankets are still fucking stupid, though.)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 03:41:40 PM
Whelp, looks like the NHTSA has sound reasons for advising against seatbelts in school-buses, so I withdraw my sarcastic indignation. (Thousand dollar bullet proof blankets are still fucking stupid, though.)
Its a mute point. Its not going to happen
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 12, 2014, 04:07:51 PM
Whelp, looks like the NHTSA has sound reasons for advising against seatbelts in school-buses, so I withdraw my sarcastic indignation. (Thousand dollar bullet proof blankets are still fucking stupid, though.)
Its a mute point. Its not going to happen
Well, yes, because points don't have any tongues.  But more importantly, it is a moot point as well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 12, 2014, 04:38:04 PM
Whelp, looks like the NHTSA has sound reasons for advising against seatbelts in school-buses, so I withdraw my sarcastic indignation. (Thousand dollar bullet proof blankets are still fucking stupid, though.)
Its a mute point. Its not going to happen
Well, yes, because points don't have any tongues.  But more importantly, it is a moot point as well.
Omg :facepalm: I'm so intelligent its scary!
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on July 08, 2014, 04:37:01 PM
I will look for it when I have more time, but there was an article, I want to say in the Hartford Courant, might have been the NY Daily News, not long after the Sandy Hook shootings that indicated that mass shootings are no more prevalent now than over the past century.  The peak was actually in the 20's if I recall, with small rises in the '60's and '90's. 

It's about coverage, and the glut of shows that capitalize on the aftermath, and the increased politicization of the events.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 18, 2015, 04:05:00 PM
Damn. Looks like it's been nearly a year since we had a shooting to prompt another round of "guns are icky" discussion. Maybe they weren't becoming more commonplace after all.

In any event, after this asshole murders a lot of black folk attending church the government declares it a possible hate crime. I'm looking at some comments and a lot of people on the FOX page are blasting the whole hate crime thing. "He's a murderer, not a hate criminal." I happen to agree with this sentiment, actually. Hate crime designations seem silly to me. At the same time, it seems to me like the same people over at FOX's site blasting the liberal agenda of looking at hate crimes differently from the crimes they actually commit are the exact same people who hold their indignation in check until they find out if some other asshole murderer is a Moslem or not so they know whether or not to treat it with disdain or fucking fury because it's terrorism. If this guy is just an asshole murderer and that's the only thing we should be stringing him up for, then why doesn't that apply to Atta or Maj. Hassan? They both commit mass murder and yet their motivations determine the degree of outrage they get subjected to. Pick one of the other, it seems. Either their motivation matters in the final equation or it doesn't.

Even setting aside the American obliteration of the definition of terrorism/terrorist, it seems pretty silly to get pissed off about the whole hate crime thing while treating terrorists as far worse than typical mass murderers or spree killers.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 18, 2015, 07:07:43 PM
Flipping around the dial watching the coverage of it, you can say what you want about Fox News and Megyn Kelly, but mad props to her for making it a policy to not identify killers like this by name or to show their face.  The rest of the media needs to follow suit.  Disgusting pieces of filth like this do not deserve the notoriety they often seek.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on June 18, 2015, 07:27:42 PM
,
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 18, 2015, 07:38:44 PM
Hasan wasn't organized. Neither were those knuckleheads in Garland. None of the guys the FBI routinely entraps to protect us from their own plots are organized enough to even buy rudimentary equipment. To the extent that their actions are used to link back to other like-minded individuals, why shouldn't the same thing be said of white supremacists types?

And I'm not arguing with you, really. This is just something that occurred to me, but since I've always been annoyed by how pussies and fear mongers have distorted the T word, this just strikes me as an interesting parallel.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 19, 2015, 06:26:59 AM
Like the guy or not, Stewart pretty much nailed it.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/18/jon-stewart-charleston-no-jokes_n_7618110.html
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 19, 2015, 07:43:04 AM
 :tup
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 19, 2015, 07:44:20 AM
im currently in The Netherlands and was watching Sky News.  Every story about a murder was in the US.  It''s really sad.  The same news stories are being shown here and there aren't mass killings out here like there is in the USA. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: PuffyPat on June 19, 2015, 08:59:30 AM
terrorism doesn't have to be a large group of people who plan out everything with great detail. it can be just one person who decides that they want to go and shoot up a church.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 19, 2015, 09:21:42 AM
terrorism doesn't have to be a large group of people who plan out everything with great detail. it can be just one person who decides that they want to go and shoot up a church.
But it does have to be a part of a larger campaign. That's the whole point. Promoting an agenda by scaring the populace shitless.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 19, 2015, 12:44:36 PM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.

I'm inclined to agree that cops are asserting way too much authority here, and people are oblivious to what's going on. That doesn't change the fact that he put himself into the situation he's in.

And seriously, felony warrant service for a failure to appear on a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge? That's one seriously fucked up department and I'd be pissed off about it too. However, that's becoming the norm in this country. They're just lucky they didn't have wii controllers in their hands.

But don't oversimplify it; it's an excuse.  It's the law.  Whether it is just or not isn't the point.  It's the law.  There are a lot of laws that I think are as silly (or sillier) than pot charges, but I don't get to break them (or worse, shoot someone) because I disagree with them. 

And actually, as one might think about this as an argument to legalize weed, I would argue it is exactly why these people are in jail.  They don't give a shit about the law.   Whether it's "dealing weed on the side" or shooting someone because they got a raw deal.  To me, the thought process is the exact same, even if the severity of trigger isn't. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 19, 2015, 12:56:13 PM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.

I'm inclined to agree that cops are asserting way too much authority here, and people are oblivious to what's going on. That doesn't change the fact that he put himself into the situation he's in.

And seriously, felony warrant service for a failure to appear on a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge? That's one seriously fucked up department and I'd be pissed off about it too. However, that's becoming the norm in this country. They're just lucky they didn't have wii controllers in their hands.

But don't oversimplify it; it's an excuse.  It's the law.  Whether it is just or not isn't the point.  It's the law.  There are a lot of laws that I think are as silly (or sillier) than pot charges, but I don't get to break them (or worse, shoot someone) because I disagree with them. 

And actually, as one might think about this as an argument to legalize weed, I would argue it is exactly why these people are in jail.  They don't give a shit about the law.   Whether it's "dealing weed on the side" or shooting someone because they got a raw deal.  To me, the thought process is the exact same, even if the severity of trigger isn't.
Damn, son! I had to go back and read an article from 2012 to find out what you were quoting me about.  :lol

As I said, he brought it on himself. Nothing to debate there.

However, it was a different person involved in the misdemeanor paraphernalia bust. If you want to say that he brought it on himself by having a pipe on him, well alright. My point was that sending militarized cops to kick down his door at 0-dark thirty is not the way we should be allowing things to happen in this country. Frankly, it's bullshit and anybody who thinks that's acceptable behavior for collecting on administrative infractions (it was the failure to appear, not the pipe at that point) is probably living in the wrong country.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on June 19, 2015, 12:58:53 PM
l
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on June 19, 2015, 01:15:27 PM
j
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 21, 2015, 12:02:02 PM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.

I'm inclined to agree that cops are asserting way too much authority here, and people are oblivious to what's going on. That doesn't change the fact that he put himself into the situation he's in.

And seriously, felony warrant service for a failure to appear on a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge? That's one seriously fucked up department and I'd be pissed off about it too. However, that's becoming the norm in this country. They're just lucky they didn't have wii controllers in their hands.

But don't oversimplify it; it's an excuse.  It's the law.  Whether it is just or not isn't the point.  It's the law.  There are a lot of laws that I think are as silly (or sillier) than pot charges, but I don't get to break them (or worse, shoot someone) because I disagree with them. 

And actually, as one might think about this as an argument to legalize weed, I would argue it is exactly why these people are in jail.  They don't give a shit about the law.   Whether it's "dealing weed on the side" or shooting someone because they got a raw deal.  To me, the thought process is the exact same, even if the severity of trigger isn't.
Damn, son! I had to go back and read an article from 2012 to find out what you were quoting me about.  :lol

As I said, he brought it on himself. Nothing to debate there.

However, it was a different person involved in the misdemeanor paraphernalia bust. If you want to say that he brought it on himself by having a pipe on him, well alright. My point was that sending militarized cops to kick down his door at 0-dark thirty is not the way we should be allowing things to happen in this country. Frankly, it's bullshit and anybody who thinks that's acceptable behavior for collecting on administrative infractions (it was the failure to appear, not the pipe at that point) is probably living in the wrong country.

I don't dispute that last part; and I don't think that acceptable behavior.  Administrative issues should be handled administratively.

But - and I'm not talking cause and effect, I'm talking correlation here - isn't the problem the same?  On both sides?   The cops deal with an admin issue with action and force, and these shooters are (often) doing the same.   I'm not sure where this starts, but - and I think we'll agree on this - it should end where it can most readily, and that is with government.  I don't suspect that these shooters are smart (sane?) enough to get with the program, but at least if the government (here, read: police, but also mental health professionals) start being more disciplined in separating the administrative from the... non-administrative, we'd at least have something to point to as a model. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 21, 2015, 12:29:33 PM
This is the guy from the LV shooting, not the Washington one, BTW.

I'm inclined to agree that cops are asserting way too much authority here, and people are oblivious to what's going on. That doesn't change the fact that he put himself into the situation he's in.

And seriously, felony warrant service for a failure to appear on a misdemeanor paraphernalia charge? That's one seriously fucked up department and I'd be pissed off about it too. However, that's becoming the norm in this country. They're just lucky they didn't have wii controllers in their hands.

But don't oversimplify it; it's an excuse.  It's the law.  Whether it is just or not isn't the point.  It's the law.  There are a lot of laws that I think are as silly (or sillier) than pot charges, but I don't get to break them (or worse, shoot someone) because I disagree with them. 

And actually, as one might think about this as an argument to legalize weed, I would argue it is exactly why these people are in jail.  They don't give a shit about the law.   Whether it's "dealing weed on the side" or shooting someone because they got a raw deal.  To me, the thought process is the exact same, even if the severity of trigger isn't.
Damn, son! I had to go back and read an article from 2012 to find out what you were quoting me about.  :lol

As I said, he brought it on himself. Nothing to debate there.

However, it was a different person involved in the misdemeanor paraphernalia bust. If you want to say that he brought it on himself by having a pipe on him, well alright. My point was that sending militarized cops to kick down his door at 0-dark thirty is not the way we should be allowing things to happen in this country. Frankly, it's bullshit and anybody who thinks that's acceptable behavior for collecting on administrative infractions (it was the failure to appear, not the pipe at that point) is probably living in the wrong country.

I don't dispute that last part; and I don't think that acceptable behavior.  Administrative issues should be handled administratively.

But - and I'm not talking cause and effect, I'm talking correlation here - isn't the problem the same?  On both sides?   The cops deal with an admin issue with action and force, and these shooters are (often) doing the same.   I'm not sure where this starts, but - and I think we'll agree on this - it should end where it can most readily, and that is with government.  I don't suspect that these shooters are smart (sane?) enough to get with the program, but at least if the government (here, read: police, but also mental health professionals) start being more disciplined in separating the administrative from the... non-administrative, we'd at least have something to point to as a model.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing the correlation. We're talking about shooters and we're talking about a doper who didn't pay his ticket. The latter is treated the same as the former. Cops have to be able to use some discretion to sort out who the dangerous ones are and who the nobodys are. There's a reason when you and I get a speeding ticket we don't get the full felony stop (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDj32pQ6ohY) treatment. There's no basis to conclude that we're going to shoot Johnny in the face as he approaches the car. Not sure why the guy who didn't pay the ticket on his grass pipe is any different.

And frankly, I'd say that treating him as such greatly increases the risk to both Johnny and the doper and his family. I doubt they cared much about the latter, but the former is precisely why they [ostensibly] decided to take the militaristic approach in the first place.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 21, 2015, 08:14:22 PM
I think we're actually saying something similar.  I agree they shouldn't be handled in the same way, and while I don't think the doper is acting out SOLELY in retaliation for the cops' behavior (I think some of it goes the other way, too), that doesn't make it right.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 05, 2015, 03:14:18 PM
Since this was the most recent of the numerous "guns are icky" threads in DTF I figure I'd follow up on this here.

OK.

BTW, I have zero interest in banning guns.  However, I see no valid reason not to have tighter gun control laws than we currently have on the books.

For the record, I'm with you.  I had my license for a long time (let it expire when I moved out of state).  I don't mind scrutiny that is well-thought out and would be effective at weeding out the Dylann Whatevers and Adam Lanzas of the world.  I just don't want hurdles that result in an effective ban or a precursor to a ban.

I'm with you both 100%.  I carry (legally licensed and trained) daily, and I believe in the right to carry if a person so chooses... I also think that more stringent controls wouldn't hurt anyone that wishes to LEGALLY carry.  When I purchased my main carry firearm, I was in-and-out of the store in 10-minutes; no kidding.  The automatic state police background check system that is in place took 30-seconds I'd say... a more in-depth screening process wouldn't bother me in the slightest. 

I'll be honest about something that does bother me about Virginia's laws regarding firearms... Virginia is an open-carry state.  That boggles my mind... if you're going to carry, why not take the time (either 4-hour on-line class and one day of course training or a live class including both), pay the fee, and obtain a conceal-carry license?  Why carry open?  For myself, I don't want anyone to know that I carry.  I don't see it often, but when I do see it I wonder why someone would want to open carry when it is relatively easy to obtain a conceal-carry permit.

And I guess this goes back to the original point of the thread... if Virginia were to attempt to eliminate open-carry, I'd bet that I'd see a whole lot more open carry and holster sales would go through the roof.
Open vs. concealed carry interests me. Texas has just passed open carry (concealed has been around since Hennard became a dissatisfied Luby's customer). I can kind of see the logic, but I honestly think that letting everybody know who does and does not carry is a dodgy idea. In the end there's something to be said for being part of the anonymous 5%. With that in mind I suppose that allowing both makes some sense. In this case they both require the same course and permit so it really just becomes personal preference.

On a personal note, despite being a gun owner myself, I'm not thrilled about the idea of Texas looking like Dodge City. I kind of prefer not noticing when people are packing.

The Virginia thing is odd to me. Why one should require a permit/classes and not the other doesn't make much sense.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 05, 2015, 03:18:39 PM
h
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 10, 2015, 03:12:43 PM
In the end there's something to be said for being part of the anonymous 5%.

On a personal note, despite being a gun owner myself, I'm not thrilled about the idea of Texas looking like Dodge City. I kind of prefer not noticing when people are packing.

I've had my CCW for...jeez....8 years now....and I'm fairly honest in P/R about my stance on gun ownership. But, for the life of me I can't see the benefit of open Carrying a gun. I didn't get my permit to be 'cool' or as a status symbol....it's to protect me and my family from any clown who thinks it's a good idea to threaten our lives.

IMO Open carry is nothing more than being a cocky, antagonistic A hole. Just because you 'can' do something doesn't mean you 'should'. If you're standing in line at a gas station wearing your nice shiny Colt .45 for everyone to see and someone comes in to rob it....guess who they are shooting first? The dude wearing a gun. I prefer no one to know that I am carrying a weapon....hence the 'conceal' part of the carry.

Not trying to offend any of you if you open carry but c'mon.....especially now days, all that does is stir up sh%t that doesn't need to be stirred.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 10, 2015, 04:24:48 PM
gh
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 10, 2015, 04:30:10 PM
If you're standing in line at a gas station wearing your nice shiny Colt .45 for everyone to see and someone comes in to rob it....guess who they are shooting first? The dude wearing a gun.

I'm betting the majority of robberies are by people that don't want to shoot anybody.  So I doubt they'd want to start their robbery with a surprise execution.  It immediately puts you in that "oh crap.  I've gone so far that I absolutely better not get caught now."

I think the more realistic reaction is that they would just delay the robbery until that person has left.

maybe...who knows. I'm not confident enough to rule out anyone who is going to rob a store or whatever not to have it in them to just shoot the largest threat in the room. My point is....no one needs to know you have a gun
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 10, 2015, 04:54:29 PM
g
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 11, 2015, 06:36:49 AM
If you're standing in line at a gas station wearing your nice shiny Colt .45 for everyone to see and someone comes in to rob it....guess who they are shooting first? The dude wearing a gun.

I'm betting the majority of robberies are by people that don't want to shoot anybody.  So I doubt they'd want to start their robbery with a surprise execution.  It immediately puts you in that "oh crap.  I've gone so far that I absolutely better not get caught now."

I think the more realistic reaction is that they would just delay the robbery until that person has left.

maybe...who knows. I'm not confident enough to rule out anyone who is going to rob a store or whatever not to have it in them to just shoot the largest threat in the room. My point is....no one needs to know you have a gun

I don't think it is that easy.   We can't think about this as we would in that situation, but how others would.  I think it just as likely that someone would come up to rob that gas station, see the gun, and think... "F*** this noise; I'm hitting that Exxon down the street."   I don't think either is absolute, or 100% correct, but this is one of the problems with an issue as complicated as gun ownership; it is not an acceptable evaluation to just think "what would I do?".  That's where you get into the "I don't see the need for..." arguments, which to me are totally nonsensical and inappropriate.   I don't see the need for fake tits either, but they are out there.  A lot of them.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: vtgrad on August 11, 2015, 10:14:09 AM


On a personal note, despite being a gun owner myself, I'm not thrilled about the idea of Texas looking like Dodge City. I kind of prefer not noticing when people are packing.

The Virginia thing is odd to me. Why one should require a permit/classes and not the other doesn't make much sense.

That's what doesn't make sense to me either.  I've been told by several of my friends (including the Federal Parole office that trained me) that even though it's legal to do so, you'd better have a damn good reason for open carrying in a public place when questioned by the owner of said place (restaurants, stores, etc...) or law enforcement.

In the end there's something to be said for being part of the anonymous 5%.

On a personal note, despite being a gun owner myself, I'm not thrilled about the idea of Texas looking like Dodge City. I kind of prefer not noticing when people are packing.

I've had my CCW for...jeez....8 years now....and I'm fairly honest in P/R about my stance on gun ownership. But, for the life of me I can't see the benefit of open Carrying a gun. I didn't get my permit to be 'cool' or as a status symbol....it's to protect me and my family from any clown who thinks it's a good idea to threaten our lives.

IMO Open carry is nothing more than being a cocky, antagonistic A hole. Just because you 'can' do something doesn't mean you 'should'. If you're standing in line at a gas station wearing your nice shiny Colt .45 for everyone to see and someone comes in to rob it....guess who they are shooting first? The dude wearing a gun. I prefer no one to know that I am carrying a weapon....hence the 'conceal' part of the carry.

Not trying to offend any of you if you open carry but c'mon.....especially now days, all that does is stir up sh%t that doesn't need to be stirred.

You basically made my point... just in a more direct way  :biggrin:.  Open carry simply makes me a little bit uncomfortable... even as a person with a good deal of experience with firearms THAT IS ALSO CARRYING A FIREARM.

 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 11, 2015, 10:25:46 AM
'Murica

(https://ww3.hdnux.com/photos/30/26/42/6383782/6/920x920.jpg)
(https://media2.policymic.com/2669b24ea8b68f5e8caf7f2359583521.jpg)
(https://media.cmgdigital.com/shared/lt/lt_cache/thumbnail/615/img/photos/2014/03/12/5e/12/rgz_open_carry_07.JPG)
(https://www.thetexpatch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/BoVXiCtIIAA0X1x.jpg-large.jpeg)
(https://www.motherjones.com/files/target-open-carry-1-630.jpg)
(https://issuehawk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/opencarry.jpg)

Fucking lunatics.

I can understand wanting to carry a handgun around, and I'm not entirely against people wanting to carry one visibly (though I'd have no desire to). But this desire to go out in public with a rifle strapped to you is beyond me. I can't help but think there is an underlying level of paranoia or mental instability there. That person's brain is way more terrifying than the gun. Think about it. If you live in a city or country where you feel you aren't safe unless you walk around with AK-47, maybe you should think about moving to an area where you don't feel that way.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 11, 2015, 11:01:20 AM
If you live in a city or country where you feel you aren't safe unless you walk around with AK-47, maybe you should think about moving to an area where you don't feel that way.

Again....I'm as big of gun rights guy there is around and I have failed to find one good reason for someone to have to open carry an assault rifle around. Short of the Zombie apocalypse or an outright collapse of civility and law.....IMO there is no good reason and if you are you are just doing it to be a dick, cunt...stir up crap or all of the above.


(https://issuehawk.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/opencarry.jpg)

I'm gonna do something I hate doing and that is 'judge' based off a photo....but my spidey senses tell me that these two have no business owning those guns. Dude on the right just wants to 'look cool' and I'd bet $100 he has no idea how to take that weapon apart and clean it. Anyway.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 11, 2015, 11:09:53 AM

I'm gonna do something I hate doing and that is 'judge' based off a photo....but my spidey senses tell me that these two have no business owning those guns. Dude on the right just wants to 'look cool' and I'd bet $100 he has no idea how to take that weapon apart and clean it. Anyway.....

I feel like the guy on the left knows what he's doing. The guy on the right looks like he can't wait for the day where he gets to actually use it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: vtgrad on August 11, 2015, 12:26:44 PM

I'm gonna do something I hate doing and that is 'judge' based off a photo....but my spidey senses tell me that these two have no business owning those guns. Dude on the right just wants to 'look cool' and I'd bet $100 he has no idea how to take that weapon apart and clean it. Anyway.....

I feel like the guy on the left knows what he's doing. The guy on the right looks like he can't wait for the day where he gets to actually use it.

At the very least, the guy on the left has it in safe position and is not hovering a finger over the trigger (I can't tell if the other guy is looped inside the guard or not).

I'll side with G on this one and opine that maybe cowboy hat in the first photo, the guys at the table, and maw maw in Target (really... a shotgun for personal protection in a public place... hope it's not loaded with bird-shot) probably know how to disassemble and clean their choice of weapon.  I'll also say that IMO, unless your job requires it, you're in a parade, or George Romero is the author of your universe, carrying those weapons open gives those of us that carry day-in and day-out a bum rap.  Of course, if you carry concealed, nobody knows (no-body-knows; etrade commercial), so that bum rap can be absorbed internally.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 11, 2015, 12:36:49 PM
Some of them are doing it just to make a statement, and some of them are nimrods. I think a couple of them just happened to have their weapons on them. Most of these people would spend far, far more time trying to get their weapons into the ready position than it'd take to find cover or get shot in the face.

And at least in Texas, long guns have always been an exception to the rule. They've always been legal to carry in public. Growing up you'd see them in the back windows of trucks all the time.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 11, 2015, 01:10:55 PM
Some of them are doing it just to make a statement, and some of them are nimrods. I think a couple of them just happened to have their weapons on them. Most of these people would spend far, far more time trying to get their weapons into the ready position than it'd take to find cover or get shot in the face.

And at least in Texas, long guns have always been an exception to the rule. They've always been legal to carry in public. Growing up you'd see them in the back windows of trucks all the time.

Even in Connecticut, I'm old enough to remember seeing them in the gun racks behind the seat of a pickup truck.

I dunno, maybe I'm a lunatic, nimrod, or dangerous, but while I wouldn't be caught with one of those on me either, except for the Target photo (and even that...) I just don't see how this is different than seeing any of a number of people that choose to live outside of what's considered normal.   Would we post pictures of men with their nails done and comment on their mental state? 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 11, 2015, 01:19:59 PM
Some of them are doing it just to make a statement, and some of them are nimrods. I think a couple of them just happened to have their weapons on them. Most of these people would spend far, far more time trying to get their weapons into the ready position than it'd take to find cover or get shot in the face.

And at least in Texas, long guns have always been an exception to the rule. They've always been legal to carry in public. Growing up you'd see them in the back windows of trucks all the time.

Even in Connecticut, I'm old enough to remember seeing them in the gun racks behind the seat of a pickup truck.

I dunno, maybe I'm a lunatic, nimrod, or dangerous, but while I wouldn't be caught with one of those on me either, except for the Target photo (and even that...) I just don't see how this is different than seeing any of a number of people that choose to live outside of what's considered normal.   Would we post pictures of men with their nails done and comment on their mental state?

No, because one is an entirely aesthetic choice while the other, if not treated with the proper respect, could accidentally blow the head off a child trying to decided between a Kit Kat or M&Ms at the candy rack in Target. The worst a guy with pretty nails is going to do is scratch you. I don't think it's fair to compare ones preference of how their body looks to someone that feels like they need to walk around with an assault weapon.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on August 11, 2015, 03:14:45 PM
I honestly would not feel comfortable walking around people like that.  I already don't like walking into Penn Station and seeing all the cops with their assault rifles and they are there to protect.  I'd have no assurance of safety standing next to some random dude with one of those guns. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 11, 2015, 03:42:09 PM
I honestly would not feel comfortable walking around people like that.  I already don't like walking into Penn Station and seeing all the cops with their assault rifles and they are there to protect.  I'd have no assurance of safety standing next to some random dude with one of those guns.

Well in fairness.....most guns have redundant safety systems where a couple factors have to be in place before it'll fire. Grip safety's as well as safety switches.....single action rather than double action. I know there are accidental discharges that occur but all in all you really have to try to fire a gun to get it to fire.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 11, 2015, 04:50:27 PM
I honestly would not feel comfortable walking around people like that.  I already don't like walking into Penn Station and seeing all the cops with their assault rifles and they are there to protect.  I'd have no assurance of safety standing next to some random dude with one of those guns.

Well in fairness.....most guns have redundant safety systems where a couple factors have to be in place before it'll fire. Grip safety's as well as safety switches.....single action rather than double action. I know there are accidental discharges that occur but all in all you really have to try to fire a gun to get it to fire.
Certainly you're correct about safeties and whatnot. However, and I believe you and I have discussed this before, there's a completely different mindset that comes into play when weapons are introduced. I've said that the reason I have no interest in CCW is because I don't want to have to adopt that mentality just going through the normal course of my day to day life. There's a similar thing with other people, more-so since I don't really have a sense who or what they are. While the level of risk only goes up slightly, IMO, the consequence of failure skyrockets. A statement I've made about airline pilots is that I want them to always be on their A-game, but I don't want that A-game requirement to be the difference between an uneventful flight and being a lawn dart. In this case you're now looking at eating dinner somewhere where you have to be mindful of the guy with the PSG1 over the shoulder, but also hopeful that he's not having a shitty day, confounded by numerous real-word complications eating into his valuable mental resources. It's a complication and sense of seriousness that is palpable, IMO.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on August 11, 2015, 05:32:30 PM
I honestly would not feel comfortable walking around people like that.  I already don't like walking into Penn Station and seeing all the cops with their assault rifles and they are there to protect.  I'd have no assurance of safety standing next to some random dude with one of those guns.

Well in fairness.....most guns have redundant safety systems where a couple factors have to be in place before it'll fire. Grip safety's as well as safety switches.....single action rather than double action. I know there are accidental discharges that occur but all in all you really have to try to fire a gun to get it to fire.
Certainly you're correct about safeties and whatnot. However, and I believe you and I have discussed this before, there's a completely different mindset that comes into play when weapons are introduced. I've said that the reason I have no interest in CCW is because I don't want to have to adopt that mentality just going through the normal course of my day to day life. There's a similar thing with other people, more-so since I don't really have a sense who or what they are. While the level of risk only goes up slightly, IMO, the consequence of failure skyrockets. A statement I've made about airline pilots is that I want them to always be on their A-game, but I don't want that A-game requirement to be the difference between an uneventful flight and being a lawn dart. In this case you're now looking at eating dinner somewhere where you have to be mindful of the guy with the PSG1 over the shoulder, but also hopeful that he's not having a shitty day, confounded by numerous real-word complications eating into his valuable mental resources. It's a complication and sense of seriousness that is palpable, IMO.


This is a good post, and basically sums up my thoughts. Gun control is one issue I flip flop on quite a bit, it's interesting to read everyone's take on it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 11, 2015, 08:52:58 PM
I honestly would not feel comfortable walking around people like that.  I already don't like walking into Penn Station and seeing all the cops with their assault rifles and they are there to protect.  I'd have no assurance of safety standing next to some random dude with one of those guns.

Well in fairness.....most guns have redundant safety systems where a couple factors have to be in place before it'll fire. Grip safety's as well as safety switches.....single action rather than double action. I know there are accidental discharges that occur but all in all you really have to try to fire a gun to get it to fire.
Certainly you're correct about safeties and whatnot. However, and I believe you and I have discussed this before, there's a completely different mindset that comes into play when weapons are introduced. I've said that the reason I have no interest in CCW is because I don't want to have to adopt that mentality just going through the normal course of my day to day life. There's a similar thing with other people, more-so since I don't really have a sense who or what they are. While the level of risk only goes up slightly, IMO, the consequence of failure skyrockets. A statement I've made about airline pilots is that I want them to always be on their A-game, but I don't want that A-game requirement to be the difference between an uneventful flight and being a lawn dart. In this case you're now looking at eating dinner somewhere where you have to be mindful of the guy with the PSG1 over the shoulder, but also hopeful that he's not having a shitty day, confounded by numerous real-word complications eating into his valuable mental resources. It's a complication and sense of seriousness that is palpable, IMO.

Yeah....those are good points EB. And you're correct, having a CCW and carrying a gun does affect some of my decisions. Not so much where I go but how I act and the things I say in conversation. The consequence of failure may not just be on the weapon itself either but as we've seen the system in which 'we' are checked still has flaws to where people who maybe shouldn't own a gun do get one.

We've talked about that as well and I just don't know how you can assure a nut job who has no 'technical' record of being nuts doesn't acquire a gun? If there's no paper trail or anything to 'dig up'....how do you know or what can you do. Any type of psych evaluation is subjective and gives those who are giving the yeah or neah to a person based on their evaluation WAY to much power to do so. It's too subjective IMO.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 12, 2015, 06:46:20 AM
j
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 10:35:06 AM
This shooting today is freaking terrible. The shooter filmed himself in the first person and uploaded it. Really disturbing to watch.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 11:53:45 AM
h
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on August 26, 2015, 12:00:08 PM
I also don't plan on watching and honestly I feel like the media should not be spreading this video.  Besides being something very violent and personal, I think this is a great example of sensationalizing the crime.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on August 26, 2015, 12:04:19 PM
This is the first time I can think of where the shooter filmed himself during the act....

....cue the copycat crimes in 5, 4, 3....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:04:24 PM
I also don't plan on watching and honestly I feel like the media should not be spreading this video.  Besides being something very violent and personal, I think this is a great example of sensationalizing the crime.

I haven't seen any media source with the first person video. I went to youtube for that one.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 12:04:42 PM
This shooting today is freaking terrible. The shooter filmed himself in the first person and uploaded it. Really disturbing to watch.
What, did he Go-Pro the thing?

And I haven't seen the media disseminating the thing. I've seen the live, on-air footage which doesn't actually show anything graphic, but even that was a small window in only one article I saw.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:07:02 PM
This shooting today is freaking terrible. The shooter filmed himself in the first person and uploaded it. Really disturbing to watch.
What, did he Go-Pro the thing?


I've read it was a go-pro, but who knows. It might have been a phone. He appeared to be holding the recording device in one hand and the gun in the other. It probably wasn't a go pro. He got the video online pretty fast which makes me think it might have been a phone. That is unless go-pros can upload video to youtube (I don't know if they can).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on August 26, 2015, 12:10:43 PM
I also don't plan on watching and honestly I feel like the media should not be spreading this video.  Besides being something very violent and personal, I think this is a great example of sensationalizing the crime.

I haven't seen any media source with the first person video. I went to youtube for that one.

A friend told me he watched it on yahoo but I did not verify that myself.  But my feelings spread beyond news services, like youtube twitter and whatnot although I udnerstand once it hits the internet that it's not likely to get off the internet.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:12:01 PM
Here's a gif from the first person clip. This clip does not show the gun fire. Nothing graphic and SFW

https://i.imgur.com/0bR9qwn.gif

It's absolutely insane how close he gets without anyone noticing. There's quite a bit more footage beyond where the gif leaves off. After drawing the gun the first time, he backs away and waits a while longer, all the while no one seems to notice him. It's almost like he waited because he knew the camera guy didn't have her in the shot.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 12:26:31 PM
f
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on August 26, 2015, 12:29:45 PM
CNN now reporting that his manifesto claims he was the victim of discrimination and bullying because he was gay and black.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on August 26, 2015, 12:30:46 PM
And decided to this after the tragedy in South Carolina.

Ugh.

This story is already horrific, and is just gonna get worse now.  :(
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:32:28 PM
CNN now reporting that his manifesto claims he was the victim of discrimination and bullying because he was gay and black.


(https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/512811fd4c7e77212fe5e7afb1e7fc1410fe23cf/c=68-0-1568-2000&r=383&c=0-0-380-510/local/-/media/2015/08/26/USATODAY/USATODAY/635761950996296689-AP-On-Air-Shooting.jpg)

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:33:35 PM
Just got an alert on my phone from Fox News saying that the shooter has died.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 12:35:22 PM
f
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 12:37:30 PM
f
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:40:18 PM
The media's presentation of this has been interesting compared to those in the past. My access has been limited here at work, but everything I'm seeing seems to be talking mostly about how great the two victims were. I'm seeing lots of photos they posted and kind words from family and friends. I see very little sharing and replaying of the video compared to shootings in the recent past. I guess the thought process around and incident like this is a lot different when the victims are your own.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 26, 2015, 12:44:24 PM
Wait.  He etched the SC Church victims initials into the bullets?  So we ban black, gay churches?  Or maybe we ban engravers?  I'm going with engravers.

Looks like he called out Dylan Roof specifically as well.

Quote
“As for Dylann Roof? You (deleted)! You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE …(deleted)!!!” He said Jehovah spoke to him, telling him to act.

Thanks Jehova.


I hope this is a wake up call to all news/media outlets that constantly covering these events can lead to more tragedy. This dude pretty much confirmed the thread title.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 12:59:24 PM
f
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 01:00:12 PM
Honestly, I'm not sure why this isn't dumped into the shit happens pile. It's a big deal because it happened on live TV and he filmed it, I guess. All of the other factors are trivial. People murder each other over perceived slights and employment matters all the time. While unfortunate, this really is just the senseless murder of a couple of people and doesn't really need to have much more than that read into it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 26, 2015, 01:08:10 PM
It's absolutely insane how close he gets without anyone noticing. There's quite a bit more footage beyond where the gif leaves off. After drawing the gun the first time, he backs away and waits a while longer, all the while no one seems to notice him. It's almost like he waited because he knew the camera guy didn't have her in the shot.

This is exactly why he didn't shoot....It's pretty obvious that's the case.

Of course this will be the fault of 'weak' gun laws.....and this guy will get a pass by a lot of people because he had a 'mental' disorder which are both BS. He was just a POS who most likely blamed everyone else but himself for a lifetime of failures.....because, he sucked as a person.

Two people are dead because this guy didn't get his way. It's a relief he killed himself, otherwise we'd have most likely supported him while he served out his life sentence or waited 30 years to be executed. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: MrBoom_shack-a-lack on August 26, 2015, 01:24:17 PM
Don't wanna go all sentimental here but I read a thread on Reddit whishing everyone to not learn anything about the gunman and if they start talking, turn it off. Don't make him the star of this story. RIP Reporter Alison Parker (24) and Cameraman Adam Ward (27).

(https://i.imgur.com/Dbex5ul.jpg)

I know I know, like Reddit or media will listen....

Still though I think it's nice and feel more human than to dwell into a crazy persons brain, we have enough of that already. Besides attention is what they want anyway.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 01:34:00 PM
f
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 01:40:54 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: vtgrad on August 26, 2015, 01:49:07 PM
I guess the thought process around and incident like this is a lot different when the victims are your own.

Or maybe the fact that the victim's friends are part of the media, so they have stories and pictures ready instantaneously as opposed to trying to track it down, verify its authenticity, etc.

And this is a big part of why I can't watch these murder videos (ISIS being the most obvious recent examples).  While actual gore is a big part of why I don't want to see it, it is more about seeing somebody right before they die.  Seeing them as a living, breathing being that's seconds away from being no more.  Possibly seeing the fear or confusion in their eyes and contorted expressions trying to quickly come to terms that "this is it."  That's much worse than any gore.

Now if the victim is the actual murderer later on in a video, then it is mostly just about not wanting to see the gore.

And hearing.  Her screams are the only noise aside from the shots themselves.  Terrible.

Hard to believe. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 02:05:48 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 26, 2015, 03:00:04 PM
Don't wanna go all sentimental here but I read a thread on Reddit whishing everyone to not learn anything about the gunman and if they start talking, turn it off. Don't make him the star of this story. RIP Reporter Alison Parker (24) and Cameraman Adam Ward (27).

(https://i.imgur.com/Dbex5ul.jpg)

I know I know, like Reddit or media will listen....

Still though I think it's nice and feel more human than to dwell into a crazy persons brain, we have enough of that already. Besides attention is what they want anyway.

But with all due respect to the victims - and I don't know about anyone else, but I feel profound sadness when I see people smiling and laughing like that when I know they have passed - we HAVE to learn more about this douche.  WHY.  HOW.   If we have any hope of preventing these senseless killings beyond the useless and knee-jerk "let's ban guns!" nonsense, we have to know more.   Why does this assbag go nuclear and the 10's of thousands of other people with the exact same sensory inputs don't?   

No, don't sensationalize him, don't make him a symbol, or worse yet, a martyr, but absolutely learn more about him so perhaps the warning signs can start to be noticed PRO-ACTIVELY, not retro-actively. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on August 26, 2015, 03:10:13 PM
But is that the job of the media or for the police?  Just pondering out loud (or on a keyboard).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 03:26:48 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 03:31:00 PM
we HAVE to learn more about this douche.  WHY.  HOW.   If we have any hope of preventing these senseless killings beyond the useless and knee-jerk "let's ban guns!" nonsense, we have to know more.   Why does this assbag go nuclear and the 10's of thousands of other people with the exact same sensory inputs don't?   

No, don't sensationalize him, don't make him a symbol, or worse yet, a martyr, but absolutely learn more about him so perhaps the warning signs can start to be noticed PRO-ACTIVELY, not retro-actively. 
Yeah, I agree about gaining more insight into why he was such an asshole. At the same time, I'm of the opinion that preventing these senseless killings shouldn't be the number one goal. It'd certainly be good to try, but I think it's just as important for people to re-familiarize themselves with the fact that these things will happen sometimes, and there's nothing that makes them an exception this fact. Crazy people and assholes exist, will continue to exist, and will occasionally manage to snuff some people. I've always been troubled by the notion that we deserve complete safety from such instances. Take reasonable precautions, but also accept that they won't always be enough.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 05:03:31 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 26, 2015, 05:33:06 PM
I don't think there's any insight to learn about this guy other than he was a whiny, crybaby who blamed everyone else for his life's problems then decided that since no one was listening to his whiny cry baby a$$ excuses and reasons for his failed life he'd MAKE them listen.

This is the perfect example of IF he hadn't done us all the favor of killing himself and had been caught, he should have been hung in the town square the next day after being caught. No reason for a trial or to rehabilitate him....At all. Clearly guilty. Clearly pre-meditated. Clearly a hate crime.



Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 05:37:35 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 06:13:50 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on August 26, 2015, 06:22:02 PM
Don't wanna go all sentimental here but I read a thread on Reddit whishing everyone to not learn anything about the gunman and if they start talking, turn it off. Don't make him the star of this story. 

Exactly.  Say what you want about Megyn Kelly, but when this shit happens, she does not allow the name or face of the perpetrators to be said or shown on her show.  Others should be following her example.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 06:46:03 PM
Don't wanna go all sentimental here but I read a thread on Reddit whishing everyone to not learn anything about the gunman and if they start talking, turn it off. Don't make him the star of this story. 

Exactly.  Say what you want about Megyn Kelly, but when this shit happens, she does not allow the name or face of the perpetrators to be said or shown on her show.  Others should be following her example.
Like I said the last time this point was made. (https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=41707.msg1816925#msg1816925)

Although I now suppose that it would make a few people feel better via the assertion of their principles.

Also, where do you draw the line? Who can have their name published and who can't? I honestly don't see what makes this shitbag any different than 99% of the murderers in this country other than the fact that we all get to see his handiwork.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 26, 2015, 06:49:07 PM
I honestly don't see what makes this shitbag any different than 99% of the murderers in this country other than the fact that we all get to see his handiwork.

That's it. He found a "new", creative way to separate himself from the fray of nutjobs (for a short time) Unfortunately I suspect it'll just be nutjobs trying to 'one up' him from here on out....I'd most definitely expect more first person videos of people cold blooded murdering people to start surfacing now.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 06:57:06 PM
I honestly don't see what makes this shitbag any different than 99% of the murderers in this country other than the fact that we all get to see his handiwork.

That's it. He found a "new", creative way to separate himself from the fray of nutjobs (for a short time) Unfortunately I suspect it'll just be nutjobs trying to 'one up' him from here on out....I'd most definitely expect more first person videos of people cold blooded murdering people to start surfacing now.
I'd simply call that an evolution of technology. I don't think he was trying to start a new trend, and while I agree that this will now be the norm, it would have become so whether he did it or the next guy.

And didn't that asshole-loser in So-Cal who couldn't get laid record his shootings on his phone?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 26, 2015, 07:04:38 PM
I honestly don't see what makes this shitbag any different than 99% of the murderers in this country other than the fact that we all get to see his handiwork.

That's it. He found a "new", creative way to separate himself from the fray of nutjobs (for a short time) Unfortunately I suspect it'll just be nutjobs trying to 'one up' him from here on out....I'd most definitely expect more first person videos of people cold blooded murdering people to start surfacing now.
I'd simply call that an evolution of technology. I don't think he was trying to start a new trend, and while I agree that this will now be the norm, it would have become so whether he did it or the next guy.

And didn't that asshole-loser in So-Cal who couldn't get laid record his shootings on his phone?

I think he did record them also, but didn't upload them. Suppose you're correct on the 'evolution of technology' aspect. It was just a matter of time until 'this' happened.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 07:16:45 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on August 26, 2015, 08:12:12 PM
I'm honestly just waiting for the sympathizers now that it has come out that he was "bullied" because he was "black and gay"...  (I'm not putting it in quotes to be snarky, it's in quotes because it's his assertion, some of which we have yet to even verify)

It's like all morning he was a scumbag, but now that he's painted himself as a victim acting in protest of a church shooting....   Let's just say I'm bracing myself for a huge wave of, "Well...we don't agree with his methods, but we sympathize with his plight..." 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 08:25:54 PM
Let's just say I'm bracing myself for a huge wave of, "Well...we don't agree with his methods, but we sympathize with his plight..."
Why would that be wrong?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 26, 2015, 08:30:56 PM
Funny reading that from just a little over a year ago.  I'm betting the two names you mentioned are less and less memorable as time goes on and they will eventually barely be remembered as the Senator shooter dude and the Joker or Movie Theater killer dude.
They'll become less memorable as the people who were around for it die off. I remember both quite well, but that's because it was a pretty big deal at the time. But consider that everybody knows who Charles Whitman was and that was what, 50 years ago? I guess my point is that there are key aspects that might stick with people, but the name or face isn't really one of them unless there's something highly memorable about it. A freaky appearance obviously makes a difference, and I guess if some guy named Shooty McDickface goes off then people will probably remember him, as well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 26, 2015, 08:39:42 PM
and I guess if some guy named Shooty McDickface goes off then people will probably remember him, as well.

Well.....it'd be hard to forget a guy named Shooty McDickface...just saying. Heck, I may not forget that name now  :lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on August 26, 2015, 08:41:08 PM
Let's just say I'm bracing myself for a huge wave of, "Well...we don't agree with his methods, but we sympathize with his plight..."
Why would that be wrong?

Didn't you just argue we shouldn't even mention these people so that they could just be forgotten?   

I do think people need sympathy...but my sympathy ends when you just decide that you want to take out innocents and then cowardly take yourself out rather than face the music.  This pattern is just getting too common.      Any cause....any cause at all....no matter what...is only *harmed* by doing lame crap like this. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 26, 2015, 09:00:07 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jonnybaxy on August 27, 2015, 06:17:19 AM
Let's just say I'm bracing myself for a huge wave of, "Well...we don't agree with his methods, but we sympathize with his plight..."
Why would that be wrong?

Because the guy murdered 2 people...

Who cares if he's black and gay? He took 2 peoples lives away...
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 06:36:41 AM
I don't think there's any insight to learn about this guy other than he was a whiny, crybaby who blamed everyone else for his life's problems then decided that since no one was listening to his whiny cry baby a$$ excuses and reasons for his failed life he'd MAKE them listen.

I don't disagree at all with the crybaby stuff. That's completely valid. However, as far as insight goes, I wouldn't write that off just yet. For as much as we know about the brain, there is still plenty we are clueless about, much like the Earth's oceans. We've made great progress in the last decade when it comes to finding physical abnormalities in the brain that lead to certain conditions.

I think it's safe to say that none of us are about to go out and kill anyone. Many of us probably can't even imagine ourselves killing someone outside of self defense. Why is that? That's the million dollar question. People getting angry or being a crybaby isn't really the issue here. Let's face it, we all get angry and have been a crybaby at some point in our lives. So why do some take it to that next level? Why are some people (the majority) able to keep these emotions at bay while others get the desire to kill and harm? Is there an abnormality in their brain? Is there a common neural signature or wiring that could be found as a link between the majority of these acts? We find elevated levels of testosterone throughout the animal kingdom in really aggressive species, as well as over sized areas of the brain responsible for fear and aggression. It's not ridiculous to think that the human brain couldn't fall victim (dealt a shitty genetic hand) to that type of emotion.

My main argument against the death penalty is I feel like the brains are valuable. You never know what technology might yield in the decades to come. Let's take the Colorado shooter for example. He got life in prison yesterday rather than the death penalty. I think that's fantastic. He's young with 60+ years of being a potential subject for brain scientists to study. We've just started mapping the brain. In 30 years time, we could find something in this guy's brain that could give insight on how detect these kind of people in the future. For the sake of other potential victims, that's well worth not putting him down.

Again, I'm not saying had this guy lived we should have given him another chance on the street. But to have put him to death or locked him in solitary forever would have done no good. That brain needs to be kept healthy and in tact, and scientists need to be allowed to study it as deeply as they please.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 27, 2015, 08:11:43 AM
I don't think there's any insight to learn about this guy other than he was a whiny, crybaby who blamed everyone else for his life's problems then decided that since no one was listening to his whiny cry baby a$$ excuses and reasons for his failed life he'd MAKE them listen.

I don't disagree at all with the crybaby stuff. That's completely valid. However, as far as insight goes, I wouldn't write that off just yet. For as much as we know about the brain, there is still plenty we are clueless about, much like the Earth's oceans. We've made great progress in the last decade when it comes to finding physical abnormalities in the brain that lead to certain conditions.

I think it's safe to say that none of us are about to go out and kill anyone. Many of us probably can't even imagine ourselves killing someone outside of self defense. Why is that? That's the million dollar question. People getting angry or being a crybaby isn't really the issue here. Let's face it, we all get angry and have been a crybaby at some point in our lives. So why do some take it to that next level? Why are some people (the majority) able to keep these emotions at bay while others get the desire to kill and harm? Is there an abnormality in their brain? Is there a common neural signature or wiring that could be found as a link between the majority of these acts? We find elevated levels of testosterone throughout the animal kingdom in really aggressive species, as well as over sized areas of the brain responsible for fear and aggression. It's not ridiculous to think that the human brain couldn't fall victim (dealt a shitty genetic hand) to that type of emotion.

My main argument against the death penalty is I feel like the brains are valuable. You never know what technology might yield in the decades to come. Let's take the Colorado shooter for example. He got life in prison yesterday rather than the death penalty. I think that's fantastic. He's young with 60+ years of being a potential subject for brain scientists to study. We've just started mapping the brain. In 30 years time, we could find something in this guy's brain that could give insight on how detect these kind of people in the future. For the sake of other potential victims, that's well worth not putting him down.

Again, I'm not saying had this guy lived we should have given him another chance on the street. But to have put him to death or locked him in solitary forever would have done no good. That brain needs to be kept healthy and in tact, and scientists need to be allowed to study it as deeply as they please.

I totally understand where you're coming from on this Brian. But, in the extremely rare case that we'd actually be able to figure out 'what' makes 'them' do it.....what do you do then? It's almost a Minority Report situation. you test kids in 2nd grade and you find a kid with 'the' marker or trait or whatever. What then? Do you lock him up then? He's gonna do it at some point whether it be him getting an F on his math test or dumped or evicted from his home.....somethings going to set him off.

 I personally don't think we'll ever be able to 'find' whatever it is that sets these people off. I don't think it's something that will register on a test. I think it falls in line with consciousness meaning man can't prove how we have consciousness scientifically...I don't think we'll ever know 'why' these nuts do what they do.

It's my personal belief that the 'mental illness' defense of a large majority of these a$$hats is a sham and they are fully aware of what they are doing. I'm not saying that some of these murderers aren't mentally ill.....but for example.....the Colorado Shooter. He's not mentally ill. He knew what he was doing, kept notebooks of the stuff....talked to his therapist about it, planned it out from escape routes to time of movie. I think he WANTED to be mentally ill for the celebrity of it all ALA Charles Manson. But he's no more mentally ill than I am and I'd have executed him the day after he was found guilty. The only thing to learn from him is that he played the system to the max and now will live out the remainder of his days in better conditions that most of the worlds population.

When it comes to these cold blooded killers who have NO DEFENSE AT ALL  for killing the people they kill......I have a very big crisis of Faith because I know what I'm 'supposed' to do and think according to my Faith. But the emotion of it all overwhelms me and I get ticked to no end and think these people should just be removed from the equation forever. Probably not the most compassionate thing to do but it seems like the most logical.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 08:24:21 AM
Let's just say I'm bracing myself for a huge wave of, "Well...we don't agree with his methods, but we sympathize with his plight..."
Why would that be wrong?

Because the guy murdered 2 people...

Who cares if he's black and gay? He took 2 peoples lives away...
"We don't agree with his methods"

There shouldn't be any conflict with denouncing his actions and punishing him should the opportunity still present itself with considering that there might have been a wrong perpetrated against him. Nobody says that has to justify or mitigate his assholery.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 08:46:13 AM
I totally understand where you're coming from on this Brian. But, in the extremely rare case that we'd actually be able to figure out 'what' makes 'them' do it.....what do you do then? It's almost a Minority Report situation. you test kids in 2nd grade and you find a kid with 'the' marker or trait or whatever. What then? Do you lock him up then? He's gonna do it at some point whether it be him getting an F on his math test or dumped or evicted from his home.....somethings going to set him off.

 I personally don't think we'll ever be able to 'find' whatever it is that sets these people off. I don't think it's something that will register on a test. I think it falls in line with consciousness meaning man can't prove how we have consciousness scientifically...I don't think we'll ever know 'why' these nuts do what they do.

It's my personal belief that the 'mental illness' defense of a large majority of these a$$hats is a sham and they are fully aware of what they are doing. I'm not saying that some of these murderers aren't mentally ill.....but for example.....the Colorado Shooter. He's not mentally ill. He knew what he was doing, kept notebooks of the stuff....talked to his therapist about it, planned it out from escape routes to time of movie. I think he WANTED to be mentally ill for the celebrity of it all ALA Charles Manson. But he's no more mentally ill than I am and I'd have executed him the day after he was found guilty. The only thing to learn from him is that he played the system to the max and now will live out the remainder of his days in better conditions that most of the worlds population.

When it comes to these cold blooded killers who have NO DEFENSE AT ALL  for killing the people they kill......I have a very big crisis of Faith because I know what I'm 'supposed' to do and think according to my Faith. But the emotion of it all overwhelms me and I get ticked to no end and think these people should just be removed from the equation forever. Probably not the most compassionate thing to do but it seems like the most logical.
I posted this in a thread where we were discussing that asshole German Wings pilot, and it's definitely applicable to your point:

Quote from: Me
Coincidentally I read a bit about famed clock tower enthusiast Charles Whitman this morning. Here's some loser who murders his wife and mom and then shoots enough strangers to give Sergeant Hartman wood before finally shooting it out with cops and a couple of armed civvies (fuck yeah, Texas!). Real easy to think terribly of this guy. Turns out that he sought help for delusions and paranoia and found none. In his very thoughtful suicide note he implores the coroner to find out why he lost his mind. Turns out he had a 1" tumor mashing up against his amygdala. That would be enough to turn Gandhi into a bloodthirsty psychopath. His actions were absolutely the fault of a physiological flaw that he didn't want and couldn't understand, the remorse he expressed and the importance he placed on being understood in his suicide note make that pretty clear, yet he's still thought of as a real asshole for his actions. I have no idea what the motivations of the German pilot were, it's entirely possible that he was an asshole/loser (which I've flippantly called him myself). It's also perfectly likely that the dude was really fucked up. You mentioned in your post that things seem to be getting worse. I don't know if that's true or not, but I do know that we certainly haven't gotten any better at distinguishing between those two possibilities.

Moreover, without getting into a big deal about Freewill, where we're just not going to agree at all, I don't think you could argue that Freewill exists when there's a physiological condition altering one's cognitive abilities. While plenty of people do use an insanity defense (which almost never works, by the way), the truth is that a lot of sick people are denied that option because most states don't actually use reasonable characteristics to determine what qualifies. Mr. Whitman up there wouldn't have been considered insane because he knew precisely what he was doing, despite the fact that factors outside of his control were forcing his actions against his will.

None of this is meant as a defense to Shitbag Anchor-Dude or the German Wings pilot. I'm of the opinion those are just a couple of assholes. I just think it's important that we understand all of the factors we could be dealing with.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 27, 2015, 08:54:50 AM
I totally understand where you're coming from on this Brian. But, in the extremely rare case that we'd actually be able to figure out 'what' makes 'them' do it.....what do you do then? It's almost a Minority Report situation. you test kids in 2nd grade and you find a kid with 'the' marker or trait or whatever. What then? Do you lock him up then? He's gonna do it at some point whether it be him getting an F on his math test or dumped or evicted from his home.....somethings going to set him off.

 I personally don't think we'll ever be able to 'find' whatever it is that sets these people off. I don't think it's something that will register on a test. I think it falls in line with consciousness meaning man can't prove how we have consciousness scientifically...I don't think we'll ever know 'why' these nuts do what they do.

It's my personal belief that the 'mental illness' defense of a large majority of these a$$hats is a sham and they are fully aware of what they are doing. I'm not saying that some of these murderers aren't mentally ill.....but for example.....the Colorado Shooter. He's not mentally ill. He knew what he was doing, kept notebooks of the stuff....talked to his therapist about it, planned it out from escape routes to time of movie. I think he WANTED to be mentally ill for the celebrity of it all ALA Charles Manson. But he's no more mentally ill than I am and I'd have executed him the day after he was found guilty. The only thing to learn from him is that he played the system to the max and now will live out the remainder of his days in better conditions that most of the worlds population.

When it comes to these cold blooded killers who have NO DEFENSE AT ALL  for killing the people they kill......I have a very big crisis of Faith because I know what I'm 'supposed' to do and think according to my Faith. But the emotion of it all overwhelms me and I get ticked to no end and think these people should just be removed from the equation forever. Probably not the most compassionate thing to do but it seems like the most logical.
I posted this in a thread where we were discussing that asshole German Wings pilot, and it's definitely applicable to your point:

Quote from: Me
Coincidentally I read a bit about famed clock tower enthusiast Charles Whitman this morning. Here's some loser who murders his wife and mom and then shoots enough strangers to give Sergeant Hartman wood before finally shooting it out with cops and a couple of armed civvies (fuck yeah, Texas!). Real easy to think terribly of this guy. Turns out that he sought help for delusions and paranoia and found none. In his very thoughtful suicide note he implores the coroner to find out why he lost his mind. Turns out he had a 1" tumor mashing up against his amygdala. That would be enough to turn Gandhi into a bloodthirsty psychopath. His actions were absolutely the fault of a physiological flaw that he didn't want and couldn't understand, the remorse he expressed and the importance he placed on being understood in his suicide note make that pretty clear, yet he's still thought of as a real asshole for his actions. I have no idea what the motivations of the German pilot were, it's entirely possible that he was an asshole/loser (which I've flippantly called him myself). It's also perfectly likely that the dude was really fucked up. You mentioned in your post that things seem to be getting worse. I don't know if that's true or not, but I do know that we certainly haven't gotten any better at distinguishing between those two possibilities.

Moreover, without getting into a big deal about Freewill, where we're just not going to agree at all, I don't think you could argue that Freewill exists when there's a physiological condition altering one's cognitive abilities. While plenty of people do use an insanity defense (which almost never works, by the way), the truth is that a lot of sick people are denied that option because most states don't actually use reasonable characteristics to determine what qualifies. Mr. Whitman up there wouldn't have been considered insane because he knew precisely what he was doing, despite the fact that factors outside of his control were forcing his actions against his will.

None of this is meant as a defense to Shitbag Anchor-Dude or the German Wings pilot. I'm of the opinion those are just a couple of assholes. I just think it's important that we understand all of the factors we could be dealing with.

Certainly fascinating and both you and Chino (and others) have made legitimate points for studying these guys. I get it. I'll also admit that I'm a dick when it comes to people like this and allow the emotion of the story to get in the way of 'the bigger picture'.....

I still don't know what you do to kids or people who are discovered to have whatever abnormality that causes this behavior. Outside of a tumor or something physical you can remove....what if it's discovered it's genetic or something less 'physical' and unable to just remove it? Then you implement testing...find a porition of the population that are 'at risk' of going psycho and shooting people up. What do you do to them? They've done nothing yet, but we 'know' they will.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 09:04:56 AM
I still don't know what you do to kids or people who are discovered to have whatever abnormality that causes this behavior. Outside of a tumor or something physical you can remove....what if it's discovered it's genetic or something less 'physical' and unable to just remove it? Then you implement testing...find a porition of the population that are 'at risk' of going psycho and shooting people up. What do you do to them? They've done nothing yet, but we 'know' they will.

That's a tough one. Courts can order counseling, no? I've heard of judges requiring a parent to see a psychiatrist in order to continue having visitation rights. If we somehow discovered a second grader had a red flag in his or her brain, at least we know it's there. It will be on record. Make the teachers aware of the condition. Make the parents aware of the condition. Keep an eye out. Just like you'd bring a kid to regular chemo treatments if they have cancer, bring them to a psychiatrist. Mandate that they get a seal of approval every year from a doctor or something. When I was a kid, I had been ordered by a doctor to go to the nurses office once a week to have my blood pressure checked. The mentally challenged kids got special classes and mentors. We have ways of accommodating children with all kinds of disabilities. I don't see why this should be any different if detectable.

Parents might go about raising the child differently if they know about these warning signs ahead of time. Adam Lanza got the gun from his mom's collection, right? If you know your kid has one of these known conditions, maybe you don't keep guns in the house, and if you do, make sure the kid does not know the combination to the safe. Perhaps a parent will know ahead of time to keep a closer eye on what normally seems like redundant/routine behavior.

Also, if it did turn out to be a physical problem in the brain that couldn't be removed, it might be possible to engineer a drug to neutralize or dumb down the area of the brain responsible for that kind of thinking. But we can't do that until we have a better understanding of what's going on in there.

It's not an easy conversation to have, and there are a lot of elements to it, but I think it's definitely doable. I hear constantly "It's not guns, it's mental illness". Well, let's start treating it like one. That requires millions of dollars in funding and serious commitment on the government's end if they want to lessen the frequency of these events.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 09:16:24 AM
We can't go around performing CT scans on kiddos just to see if they might run amok someday. Moreover, if one were done for secondary reasons and turned up a red flag, I'd still support strict privacy rights for him. The truth is that it might be something perfectly manageable and assuming that he has to have extra safeguards at all times might actually be far worse than leaving him the hell alone. Like I said, crazy people happen.

And in Whitman's case, I believe the tumor was inoperable.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 09:25:36 AM
We can't go around performing CT scans on kiddos just to see if they might run amok someday.

Why not? We take kids every year to get physicals. They give vaccinations, check weight, height, eyes, hearing, nut sacks, reflexes, etc... Why couldn't we throw a CT scan in there at the ages of 4, 8, and 12? Maybe don't make them mandatory, but give parents the option at least.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on August 27, 2015, 09:28:59 AM
We can't go around performing CT scans on kiddos just to see if they might run amok someday.

Why not? We take kids every year to get physicals. They give vaccinations, check weight, height, eyes, hearing, nut sacks, reflexes, etc... Why couldn't we throw a CT scan in there at the ages of 4, 8, and 12? Maybe don't make them mandatory, but give parents the option at least.

Expensive and time consuming?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 09:30:50 AM
We can't go around performing CT scans on kiddos just to see if they might run amok someday.

Why not? We take kids every year to get physicals. They give vaccinations, check weight, height, eyes, hearing, nut sacks, reflexes, etc... Why couldn't we throw a CT scan in there at the ages of 4, 8, and 12? Maybe don't make them mandatory, but give parents the option at least.

Expensive and time consuming?

We could have scanned everyone in this country a few dozen times for what we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it probably would have been better spent.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 27, 2015, 09:47:00 AM
I don't think there's any insight to learn about this guy other than he was a whiny, crybaby who blamed everyone else for his life's problems then decided that since no one was listening to his whiny cry baby a$$ excuses and reasons for his failed life he'd MAKE them listen.

This is the perfect example of IF he hadn't done us all the favor of killing himself and had been caught, he should have been hung in the town square the next day after being caught. No reason for a trial or to rehabilitate him....At all. Clearly guilty. Clearly pre-meditated. Clearly a hate crime.

Sorry, bro, I can't get behind that kind of vigilante response.  I have a seven-year old stepson who already has anxiety and anger issues, and it is a challenge, believe you me.    But I can't sit here and hope he doesn't turn into one of these "whiny crybabies".  I need to act now, and every scrap of information helps me.   Adam Lanza ABSOLUTELY could have been avoided if people were more diligent on the signs, if there wasn't the stigma of having a child with those deep needs, and if there was a focus on pro-active prevention instead of re-active street justice.   My old roommate and coworker's neice was one of those children in Sandy Hook (and the school itself was in walking distance of my aunt's house) so it hits home.  You can have your blood vengeance in due time; wring him of all his relevant information first, please, okay? 

That kind of capital punishment is purely vengeance, purely retaliatory.  There is almost no element of prevention or deterrence involved.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 27, 2015, 09:55:10 AM

I still don't know what you do to kids or people who are discovered to have whatever abnormality that causes this behavior. Outside of a tumor or something physical you can remove....what if it's discovered it's genetic or something less 'physical' and unable to just remove it? Then you implement testing...find a porition of the population that are 'at risk' of going psycho and shooting people up. What do you do to them? They've done nothing yet, but we 'know' they will.

Well, we'll hopefully figure that out too.  The point is (well, my point is) if we have 100 kids, and we don't do anything and just kill them all when they commit crimes like this, then we're 0 for 100.  If by studying them, we figure out that 3, or 4, or 5, or 10 or how ever many, can be monitored, treated, cured, whatever, isn't that worth it?   I agree with el Barto, even if it doesn't seem it:  there are always going to be shitbags.  We're probably never going to be 100 for 100.   But so what?  Gun control ain't workin'; we're still 0 for 100 on that one. 

This is akin to the plagues and epidemics of the past; just burn the sick, or do we figure out that some are caused by bacteria (treatable one way), some are caused by viruses (treatable another way), some are genetic (treatable a third way) and we can focus in. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 09:59:25 AM
We can't go around performing CT scans on kiddos just to see if they might run amok someday.

Why not? We take kids every year to get physicals. They give vaccinations, check weight, height, eyes, hearing, nut sacks, reflexes, etc... Why couldn't we throw a CT scan in there at the ages of 4, 8, and 12? Maybe don't make them mandatory, but give parents the option at least.
For the reasons I listed. Trying to prevent them from acting out might cause much worse problems than letting them live their lives as-is. Moreover, we'd never be able to sort out what constitutes a red flag, so we'd be penalizing kids with no real evidence of need.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 10:50:29 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 10:55:05 AM
Are Stadler and I actually agreeing on something?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 11:08:23 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on August 27, 2015, 11:13:14 AM
Absolutely sickened to find that a paranoid nutjob from the local music scene that I'm (probably not much longer) friends with on FB is ALL over this being a hoax in order to perpetrate gun control, "just like Sandy Hook".  I have no f*cking words.  People like this should be shot into the sun.  My blood is boiling right now.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on August 27, 2015, 12:11:07 PM
Absolutely sickened to find that a paranoid nutjob from the local music scene that I'm (probably not much longer) friends with on FB is ALL over this being a hoax in order to perpetrate gun control, "just like Sandy Hook".  I have no f*cking words.  People like this should be shot into the sun.  My blood is boiling right now.

He probably listens to Alex Jones. I'm going to head over to Info Wars and see what I can find.


....

Quote
Agreed, except I have expressed outrage to every single sheep that has come within ten yards of me, for the past few years. Time for talking is over. Time for action is at hand. Our Forefathers would not hesitate, if they saw what this kenyan traitor has done to america, with the help of his zionist masters.
I dismiss anyone as soon as they say Kenyan.

Quote
The government is frightened of we the people! The only reason they are trying to take our guns! The government doesn't want a revolution because they know they will lose! Keep fighting my brothers and sisters and we will defeat the evil before us! God Speed to all!
The government is frightened of we the people? Yeah. I'm sure their armored trucks, drones, tanks, unlimited surveillance, and the rest of their arsenal are really afraid of a few guys with low grade body armor and a couple AR-15s.

Quote
Keep in mind that while he works to disarm the American people not only does he release illegal murderers back onto our streets to murder some more but his occupying SS army murders between 1 to 3 citizens a day.
Has Omaba actually done anything to disarm anyone? I know some states have, but what has Obama done?

Quote
What are u laughing about moron?--it's only matter of bribing the politicians to pass his laws. Haven't u hrd of US Federal Reserve Bank?--it's just legalized COUNTERFEITING--they just print up (and digitalize) however much money they want/need. And I guarantee u it's only matter of time before they DO get their gun-control agenda passed.
No comment.

Quote
Obama himself is more to blame than guns or even mental illness. He's the one that has fanned the flames of racial division and hatred in this country since he took office, something that undoubtedly encouraged and motivated the killer to act yesterday
Yes. Obama is directly responsible for yesterday's shooter's instability.

Quote
Obama isn't my president, however he is the biggest threat to my freedom and is possibly the biggest terrorist this country has ever seen
Lol

Quote
The only thing that is Wrong with America is "The Black Muslim President"... This sorry Muslim has ruined America by creating a Race War and underminding the America Way Of Life... Islam and his sweet muslim's that follow a false prophet and worship their allah which is Satan... Go To Hell You Black Muslim President>>>
^^^ I bet he flies a confederate flag for heritage.

Quote
FALSE FLAG. FALSE FLAG. FALSE FLAG!!!!
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on August 27, 2015, 12:15:40 PM
I really don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 27, 2015, 12:16:15 PM
Are Stadler and I actually agreeing on something?

There's a thin coat of ice on my front lawn, so apparently so.  :)

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 27, 2015, 12:27:20 PM
Here's the thing.

Talk of CT scans.  That seems extreme.  Especially since CT scans are usually not some random event considering what it entails.  It is not a pleasant experience (so I've heard) and running tons of kids through it would be a logistical nightmare.

Drugs.  I'm betting the prescriptions would be overdone, and even if they weren't, there would be tons of idiots heading a protest to stop the "drugging of our kids, 'Murica".

And I thought of Minority Report as well.  Stadler talks about stopping a few.  How would you know it was stopped v. just making the person "stopped" have a miserable life with a massive stigma.

You just have to take it as it comes.  How many cases go from "never a lick of trouble" to slaughtered a dozen people?  You might get some interviews that say that, but that's because they weren't really a big part of that persons life (or that is their defense mechanism so they aren't asked why they didn't do anything.)  So far, most of the events have had quite a few tell-tale signs leading up to the event.  That doesn't mean we have to grab them and lock them up.  But we could address them directly, temporarily take away their ability to buy a gun until resolved ... and maybe even a CT scan.

This is as much to el Barto as for you (because he is commenting on this as well), but let's keep one foot solidly on the ground here.  I'm not suggesting CAT scans for everyone, and proactive drugged stupor for anyone who has the XYZ gene.   I'm not even conceding that all (or even any) of the solutions are purely physical.   I'm just talking about populating the database so that we can profile, where appropriate and necessary, certain students that are displaying certain behaviors.   Until we started studying these things in more detail, we thought almost all serial killers were white males.  Turns out, not the case.   We started to identify certain behaviors in childhood that, when coupled with certain "trigger events" and environmental inputs, increased the tendency for violent behavior in adulthood.  That's what I'm talking about. 

Initial studies were thought to show that females made up anywhere from 4% to 10% of child molesters, but certainly not more than that.  Further, expanded study has shown that is probably low, and a recent study showed almost 50% of molestations were at the hands of a female perp.  That's meaningful.   

This is just off the top of my head, but the point is, if there is ANY tidbit that can differentiate the future Adam Lanza from the weird kid down the block (or, conversely, that links the weird kid down the block to Adam Lanza) maybe it can make a difference.  But I am not suggesting a police state with regards to this, or a sort of eugenics program for this. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 02:04:26 PM
Here's the thing.

Talk of CT scans.  That seems extreme.  Especially since CT scans are usually not some random event considering what it entails.  It is not a pleasant experience (so I've heard) and running tons of kids through it would be a logistical nightmare.

Drugs.  I'm betting the prescriptions would be overdone, and even if they weren't, there would be tons of idiots heading a protest to stop the "drugging of our kids, 'Murica".

And I thought of Minority Report as well.  Stadler talks about stopping a few.  How would you know it was stopped v. just making the person "stopped" have a miserable life with a massive stigma.

You just have to take it as it comes.  How many cases go from "never a lick of trouble" to slaughtered a dozen people?  You might get some interviews that say that, but that's because they weren't really a big part of that persons life (or that is their defense mechanism so they aren't asked why they didn't do anything.)  So far, most of the events have had quite a few tell-tale signs leading up to the event.  That doesn't mean we have to grab them and lock them up.  But we could address them directly, temporarily take away their ability to buy a gun until resolved ... and maybe even a CT scan.

This is as much to el Barto as for you (because he is commenting on this as well), but let's keep one foot solidly on the ground here.  I'm not suggesting CAT scans for everyone, and proactive drugged stupor for anyone who has the XYZ gene.   I'm not even conceding that all (or even any) of the solutions are purely physical.   I'm just talking about populating the database so that we can profile, where appropriate and necessary, certain students that are displaying certain behaviors.   Until we started studying these things in more detail, we thought almost all serial killers were white males.  Turns out, not the case.   We started to identify certain behaviors in childhood that, when coupled with certain "trigger events" and environmental inputs, increased the tendency for violent behavior in adulthood.  That's what I'm talking about. 

Initial studies were thought to show that females made up anywhere from 4% to 10% of child molesters, but certainly not more than that.  Further, expanded study has shown that is probably low, and a recent study showed almost 50% of molestations were at the hands of a female perp.  That's meaningful.   

This is just off the top of my head, but the point is, if there is ANY tidbit that can differentiate the future Adam Lanza from the weird kid down the block (or, conversely, that links the weird kid down the block to Adam Lanza) maybe it can make a difference.  But I am not suggesting a police state with regards to this, or a sort of eugenics program for this.
I wasn't considering you at all when I brought up CT scans; I was only addressing GMD's fascinating point about Minority Report and predicting the future. However, since you're now bringing this up I'll expand on my stance that trying to predict the future outcome of people would be a disaster, and the more precise you tried to be the worse. If some kid meets several of the criteria for a potential Whitman do you rent him an apartment? Hire him to work for your company? Let him attend your elementary school? Allow him to live within 1000 ft of schools, parks, bus stops and malls? Any attempt to predict whether or not somebody might go off their nut will almost guarantee that they'll never be more than failures. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on August 27, 2015, 02:12:42 PM
trying to predict the future outcome of people would be a disaster, and the more precise you tried to be the worse. If some kid meets several of the criteria for a potential Whitman do you rent him an apartment? Hire him to work for your company? Let him attend your elementary school? Allow him to live within 1000 ft of schools, parks, bus stops and malls? Any attempt to predict whether or not somebody might go off their nut will almost guarantee that they'll never be more than failures.

I agree here EB. The moment you pigeonhole people into a group....separate them out as 'different'.....those people are F'd as far as getting a fair shake in life. It'd be like a scarlet letter.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: j on August 27, 2015, 03:05:08 PM
I know you guys are probably just using "CT scan" as a placeholder for some diagnostic test that we hypothetically develop and can effectively identify some neurological differences in people like this, but to be clear...that test will most certainly NOT be a CT scan.  A CT of the brain really gives you information primarily about "macro" gross anatomy and is used to identify bleeding, ischemia, fractures, masses, inflammation to some degree, and major anatomical changes.  They're not good for much else; certainly not for telling you anything at the cellular or molecular level, and they expose you to a significant dose of ionizing radiation, so we sure as hell wouldn't be routinely lining kids up for 'em.

My guess is this hypothetical test is less likely to be an imaging study and more likely to be some kind of genetic test or invasive tissue sampling for microscopic analysis, neither of which seems practical either for different reasons.

-J
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 04:46:44 PM
Well, for my part I was referring to a "pecan sized" mass between the left and right amygdalai, and the CT seemed the most likely instrument for finding it. Looks like my attempt at armchair neurology has been validated.  :biggrin:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on August 27, 2015, 05:19:34 PM
It never ceases to amaze me when "mental health issue" is used as a get out of jail free card, that brings up no further questions. I agree that it is a mental issue, but why is that mutually exclusive from a gun issue? Why shouldn't we look into how these idiots are so free to get these guns? And further, what do these "mental health issue" proponents propose should be done about that issue? If someone is sick enough to go through with these atrocities, there's high probability to think they won't be able to afford the mental health required. But, propose changes to our health system to make it more affordable for all, ESPECIALLY those that fall into the demographic of the mentally ill, and it's seen as "socialized health care" and passed off as a dirty word. I'm sick of guys like Trump just saying "it's a mental health issue" as a way to get out of looking at guns, and offer no solutions whatsoever to the healthcare system.


Look, I've long said I'm against socialism, and for capitalism, it's why I could never vote for Bernie Sanders. That is 100% true. But perhaps medicine is something that actually benefits society as a whole, akin to military defending us all? We don't care who gets protected from attacks from outside threats, just that Americans are protected with our tax dollars, why should medicine be seen differently? Because it also looks like that is a way to protect Americans from other Americans, the mentally ill.

I'm happy to announce that I'm doing great mentally at 30 years old, but when I was 22 - 24 I was a wreck. MP members know my history, but long story short, I was badly in need of mental help, but because I was fresh out of college and had not reached the level of success a capitalist medicinal system would require someone to have obtained to receive care, I had not been able to afford it. Sometimes I'm amazed I survived that period - and I was never a threat to anyone (except myself). It is truly infuriating when "mental health issue" is just a buzzword thrown around as a way to get the conversation off of guns, and never pushed further than that. It doesn't take "red flags" or a lawyer to help, or at least it shouldn't. Why is care being obtainable by those in need such a foreign concept, and we're bickering about "red flags?"


And no, this isn't a defense of Obamacare, that law is screwed up because of other issues. But if our system actually changed overnight to a system that did allow for these sick, poor, individuals to receive proper mental health care they so badly need, guys like Trump would fight it tooth and nail. Any time guys like him use the "mental health issue" cop out I can't help but think they're full of crap.


edit: dammit, wrong thread. Oh well, it belongs in both.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 06:24:17 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 06:51:59 PM
The problem is that crazy is a bit of a sliding scale. So is being an asshole, and there's some overlap between the two. If we're talking about mental health and guns as it pertains to this most recent jerk-face, I don't see how you can really attribute crazy to him. There were red flags, but I'm not sure how you translate that to controlling gun ownership.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on August 27, 2015, 07:00:03 PM
To me, the saddest thing is that when it comes to these type of lone wolf people on suicide missions, there isn't much we can to stop them.

We can't put anyone with any kind of mental illness is an asylum, and it is often impossible to know which people are going to snap and do things like this.

Bad situation all-around. >:(
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: j on August 27, 2015, 07:08:08 PM
Well, for my part I was referring to a "pecan sized" mass between the left and right amygdalai, and the CT seemed the most likely instrument for finding it. Looks like my attempt at armchair neurology has been validated.  :biggrin:

The...mammillary body?  Sorry my neuroanatomy is super rusty. :biggrin:

Anyway on second thought, there's probably a role for PET-CT in this.  Lot of radiation, but can give you an idea of the level of metabolic activity in various parts of the brain, rather than just the basic anatomy.  As far as I know right now it's main use clinically is staging for metastatic cancer; it's a big time research tool though.

-J
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 07:14:37 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 07:20:18 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on August 27, 2015, 08:41:54 PM
[firearms and the mentally ill laws/url]
 (https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/possession-of-a-firearm-by-the-mentally-ill.aspx)

Quote
But you can't change the 2nd amendment.  Anybody that even talks about changing any amendment without another amendment is clearly a moron  :-X

Looking over the list you posted the problem is that half of those states only deal with the permit to carry. Texas has a pretty well thought out (albeit impractical) law on the matter, but it doesn't effect people who just want to buy a gun. The bigger issue, though is the second point (where I think you were being facetious). The lobbying wing of the gun manufactures (AKA the NRA) will denounce any attempt, no matter how reasonable, to place common sense restrictions on gun sales, and they'll rile up the crowd that thinks the 2nd Amendment is the simplest thing in the world.

I suspect you and I are on the same page here, in that we both support the right for normal citizens to own guns, but some common sense is definitely in order. Common sense that is unilaterally unacceptable to the NRA.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 27, 2015, 09:55:19 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 28, 2015, 12:40:56 PM
It never ceases to amaze me when "mental health issue" is used as a get out of jail free card, that brings up no further questions. I agree that it is a mental issue, but why is that mutually exclusive from a gun issue? Why shouldn't we look into how these idiots are so free to get these guns? And further, what do these "mental health issue" proponents propose should be done about that issue? If someone is sick enough to go through with these atrocities, there's high probability to think they won't be able to afford the mental health required. But, propose changes to our health system to make it more affordable for all, ESPECIALLY those that fall into the demographic of the mentally ill, and it's seen as "socialized health care" and passed off as a dirty word. I'm sick of guys like Trump just saying "it's a mental health issue" as a way to get out of looking at guns, and offer no solutions whatsoever to the healthcare system.


Look, I've long said I'm against socialism, and for capitalism, it's why I could never vote for Bernie Sanders. That is 100% true. But perhaps medicine is something that actually benefits society as a whole, akin to military defending us all? We don't care who gets protected from attacks from outside threats, just that Americans are protected with our tax dollars, why should medicine be seen differently? Because it also looks like that is a way to protect Americans from other Americans, the mentally ill.

You're, of course, right, and as another avowed capitalist, I've come around on the idea of healthcare perhaps not being best served by a market in all cases.

But the problem isn't "socialism!" or "mental health" as a GOOJF card.  It's the one size fits all mentality of all of this.  Just look at this thread (and now I'm not talking about any one poster); we seem to be pinging back and forth between extremes.  Ban guns, or put everyone with a warning sign in an asylum.  OF COURSE NOT.  But there has to be more than there is now.  We have to have people asking the right questions.  I would absolutely and unequivocally have brought up Nancy Lanza on murder charges had she lived.  She should have known better.   My jury is out on Peter Lanza.   We have schools that pay for and provide coaches for various sports; why not "mental health advocates"?  Now, this opens another issue, since I think public education is a racket (yes, I'll cite Altressa Cox-Blackwell [https://www.courant.com/community/enfield/hc-enfield-prudence-crandall-principal-suspended-20150312-story.html] again here; I don't want her selfish, arrogant ass anywhere NEAR my kid, thank you) but still.   

If my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have to jump through more hoops to get a driver's license.  I don't see why the same shouldn't be had for a gun license.   If I have certain physical abnormalities, I may be precluded from playing sports in school; I don't see why that wouldn't be the same here. 

It all has to be done in the reasonable way, a way we've done countless things in the past.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 28, 2015, 05:16:32 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on August 29, 2015, 07:21:29 AM
If my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have to jump through more hoops to get a driver's license.
Because the Bill of Rights didn't include the right to drive?

Of course, but it did include free speech, and there is arguably more "banned" or "regulated" speech than there is accepted speech.  The Supreme Court has, over the past 200 years (plus or minus) developed cogent, well-thought out processes for handling rights in a manner that is anything but "unrestricted".   "Time, place, and manner" restrictions to free speech are so common-place we don't even think about it at this point.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 29, 2015, 10:35:34 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TempusVox on August 29, 2015, 11:37:29 AM
It's all moot if we don't create the infrastructure, and change our collective mindset to support and treat people with mental illness. We continue to make it something we don't talk about; and we sure as Hell don't do anything about.

 I heard a statistic yesterday that in the 1950's there were more than 600,000 beds for the mentally ill in hospitals. But hospitalizing the mentally ill was deemed cruel. So we have 40,000 beds now. Today, if a hospital has more than 16 beds dedicated to mental health patients, then Medicare actually penalizes the amount of dollars they receive in reimbursement. And the ratio of children with mental illness to psychiatrists in the US is 4,000 to 1.

W...T...F???
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on August 29, 2015, 12:25:11 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TL on September 04, 2015, 11:26:10 AM
If my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have to jump through more hoops to get a driver's license.
Because the Bill of Rights didn't include the right to drive?
The US constitution was intended to be a living document though, with parts occasionally re-evaluated to suit the needs and realities of an ever changing society.

Thomas Jefferson once said this on the matter;
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

It was written at a time when cars didn't exist, and most guns were muskets.

Obviously it wouldn't be an easy or simple process, and absolutely wouldn't happen without significant cultural change in the US, but it could be done.
There's also the argument that the current interpretation of the 2nd amendment, as allowing individuals the right to own firearms, is actually quite recent. It only really came to prominence in the late 1970s.


That all said, in the short term, increased focus on mental health services and destigmatization of mental health issues would both be very helpful, and would be a heck of a lot easier than a constitutional amendment.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on September 04, 2015, 01:22:56 PM
If my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have to jump through more hoops to get a driver's license.
Because the Bill of Rights didn't include the right to drive?
The US constitution was intended to be a living document though, with parts occasionally re-evaluated to suit the needs and realities of an ever changing society.

Thomas Jefferson once said this on the matter;
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

It was written at a time when cars didn't exist, and most guns were muskets.

Obviously it wouldn't be an easy or simple process, and absolutely wouldn't happen without significant cultural change in the US, but it could be done.
There's also the argument that the current interpretation of the 2nd amendment, as allowing individuals the right to own firearms, is actually quite recent. It only really came to prominence in the late 1970s.


That all said, in the short term, increased focus on mental health services and destigmatization of mental health issues would both be very helpful, and would be a heck of a lot easier than a constitutional amendment.

As an attorney with a reasonable amount of constitutional law experience (though I'm no Obama), I am always intrigued by these arguments.  They invariably come up in response to the kneejerk statement using the Constitution to allow for unfettered gun ownership and usage, and as such they are invariably predicated on the assumption that moving the analysis into the 21st century would automatically yield the answer of "more gun control" and "more restrictions".  But if we're going to reevaluate, why can't it go the opposite way?  I agree that it is likely that Jefferson would be taken aback at how society has changed, but even if you take the premise that the 2nd amendment was intended only to protect the individual from the state (and not each other), there have been many developments, not least of which is the massive broadening of the scope of government (which would make Jefferson's anus pucker), the broadening of scope of the military complex, the increased militarization of the police force, etc.   I have no doubt that Jefferson would at least welcome discussion on broadening (not narrowing) the 2nd amendment rights of the citizenry, if not outright accept it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on September 04, 2015, 01:34:38 PM
That's a really intriguing notion. Not sure if it'd pan out like that, though. The "Arms" of his day were so ill-suited to anything other than use in large groups that it's very possible he'd have a complete reversal if presented with the modern day equation of cheap, powerful guns for anybody that wants one.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on September 04, 2015, 02:08:02 PM
That's a really intriguing notion. Not sure if it'd pan out like that, though. The "Arms" of his day were so ill-suited to anything other than use in large groups that it's very possible he'd have a complete reversal if presented with the modern day equation of cheap, powerful guns for anybody that wants one.

Anything is possible, of course.  You're asking relatively pedestrian thinkers to speculate on how one of the great minds in all of history (let alone his own time period) would think.  It's foolhardy.    But I reject this notion, this "ownership" of the idea that somehow it's a fait accompli that Jefferson wouldn't be open enough to not just revert to the kneejerk "government intervention will solve the problem!" response, but rather would come up with something brilliant to address the situation better than we have to date.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on September 04, 2015, 03:07:23 PM
That's a really intriguing notion. Not sure if it'd pan out like that, though. The "Arms" of his day were so ill-suited to anything other than use in large groups that it's very possible he'd have a complete reversal if presented with the modern day equation of cheap, powerful guns for anybody that wants one.

Anything is possible, of course.  You're asking relatively pedestrian thinkers to speculate on how one of the great minds in all of history (let alone his own time period) would think.  It's foolhardy.    But I reject this notion, this "ownership" of the idea that somehow it's a fait accompli that Jefferson wouldn't be open enough to not just revert to the kneejerk "government intervention will solve the problem!" response, but rather would come up with something brilliant to address the situation better than we have to date.
To the extent that pride will allow I agree with you on all of that.

Reactionism aside, his point as expressed by cramx is certainly applicable, nevertheless. The notion of an evolving vs. concrete Constitution is a critical component of how things should work around here, and particularly with regards to gun ownership. While you might be right that the founding fathers might have decided "mandatory gun ownership for all!" had they a notion of what was to come, it's still a very different thing than "any restriction on gun ownership is unconstitutional!" Which, incidentally, is also reactionary thinking on the part of the gun lobby.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TL on September 05, 2015, 11:55:27 AM
If my eyes aren't what they used to be, I have to jump through more hoops to get a driver's license.
Because the Bill of Rights didn't include the right to drive?
The US constitution was intended to be a living document though, with parts occasionally re-evaluated to suit the needs and realities of an ever changing society.

Thomas Jefferson once said this on the matter;
Quote from: Thomas Jefferson
I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

It was written at a time when cars didn't exist, and most guns were muskets.

Obviously it wouldn't be an easy or simple process, and absolutely wouldn't happen without significant cultural change in the US, but it could be done.
There's also the argument that the current interpretation of the 2nd amendment, as allowing individuals the right to own firearms, is actually quite recent. It only really came to prominence in the late 1970s.


That all said, in the short term, increased focus on mental health services and destigmatization of mental health issues would both be very helpful, and would be a heck of a lot easier than a constitutional amendment.

As an attorney with a reasonable amount of constitutional law experience (though I'm no Obama), I am always intrigued by these arguments.  They invariably come up in response to the kneejerk statement using the Constitution to allow for unfettered gun ownership and usage, and as such they are invariably predicated on the assumption that moving the analysis into the 21st century would automatically yield the answer of "more gun control" and "more restrictions".  But if we're going to reevaluate, why can't it go the opposite way?  I agree that it is likely that Jefferson would be taken aback at how society has changed, but even if you take the premise that the 2nd amendment was intended only to protect the individual from the state (and not each other), there have been many developments, not least of which is the massive broadening of the scope of government (which would make Jefferson's anus pucker), the broadening of scope of the military complex, the increased militarization of the police force, etc.   I have no doubt that Jefferson would at least welcome discussion on broadening (not narrowing) the 2nd amendment rights of the citizenry, if not outright accept it.
That's valid.
If there were any chance of members of the US government or US judiciary debating the matter with both sides making their arguments in good faith, and willing to have it actually be a debate, I'd be all for that discussion taking place.

While it's possible for a civil discussion on this to take place on these forums, I feel like both sides of the matter are too politically charged for a real, national debate to happen, at least at the present time. It would be fascinating to see it if it actually could happen though.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on September 06, 2015, 01:36:44 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on September 15, 2015, 07:10:23 AM
With the latest shooting at Delta State University, while it isn't a mass shooting, I wondered:  They described the history professor who was killed as "a beloved and accessible professor".  I never understood exactly why they do that, because it isn't like you're ever going to see an instance of this where they're truthful to the other extreme and say the victim was well known to friends and colleagues as an insufferable bastard.  I get it, speak kindly of the dead and such, but I assume the more likely motive is that the nicer a picture they can paint in your head of victim, the madder you'll be at the perpetrator of such a crime.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on September 15, 2015, 08:29:55 AM
That's valid.
If there were any chance of members of the US government or US judiciary debating the matter with both sides making their arguments in good faith, and willing to have it actually be a debate, I'd be all for that discussion taking place.

While it's possible for a civil discussion on this to take place on these forums, I feel like both sides of the matter are too politically charged for a real, national debate to happen, at least at the present time. It would be fascinating to see it if it actually could happen though.

Call me naïve, but I'd like to think that happens in the Supreme Court.  There's a tremendous desire for people (and I know there are some here, though I am not referring to you at all, TL) to politicize the Court, and assume that behind the scenes, Scalia and Thomas are mo-fo-ing Sotomayer and Ginsberg as "liberal hippy commie freaks" and vice versa as "right-wing elitist capitalist pigs".  Nothing could be further from the truth.   They (at least Scalia and Ginsburg) are rather close friends, and both understand the need to have opposing arguments to arrive at an acceptable "truth".  It's not personal (like it gets here with some), it's not political (like it gets on the national stage with some), it's intellectual, with the common goal of setting a path for the country to navigate, where it can, with respect to the rights and liberties we enjoy as citizens. 

It's not a contest, it's not a war, it's not combat in which a foe is to be vanquished.  It is lost on most that much of the dissent was not focused on the rights at hand - in other words, the dissenters were not "anti-gay" - but rather on the process for how we as a country got to where we are.  The dissenters were far more worried (though not SOLELY so) on the mob-mentality that brought that case to the fore than they were on any so-called (and illusory) "erosion" of morals or whatever the anti-gay message is about.   They wanted - for history's sake and for precedent's sake - the right answer for the right reasons, not the probable right answer because it sounds good but was arrived at for the wrong reasons (i.e. judicial activism). 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on September 15, 2015, 08:48:40 AM
Call me naïve, but I'd like to think that happens in the Supreme Court.  There's a tremendous desire for people (and I know there are some here, though I am not referring to you at all, TL) to politicize the Court, and assume that behind the scenes, Scalia and Thomas are mo-fo-ing Sotomayer and Ginsberg as "liberal hippy commie freaks" and vice versa as "right-wing elitist capitalist pigs".  Nothing could be further from the truth.   They (at least Scalia and Ginsburg) are rather close friends, and both understand the need to have opposing arguments to arrive at an acceptable "truth".  It's not personal (like it gets here with some), it's not political (like it gets on the national stage with some), it's intellectual, with the common goal of setting a path for the country to navigate, where it can, with respect to the rights and liberties we enjoy as citizens. 

While it's true that they remain very cordial on a personal level (Thomas and Bryer are also pretty chummy), Scalia is becoming increasingly hostile towards his colleagues in his opinions. There have been a few times when he's really come off as a tremendous tool. I thought he crossed the line a couple of times recently with his bile.

Still, I mostly agree with your point.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Scorpion on September 15, 2015, 09:01:31 AM
While I would like to believe your view on SCOTUS, at least Scalia's opinion on Obergefell v. Hodges doesn't exactly read like that of a person who was a tremendous amount of respect for opposing points of views.

EDIT: Basically what Barto said.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on September 15, 2015, 06:41:11 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on October 01, 2015, 06:20:02 PM
Another one.

Umpqua Community College in Roseburg OR. 10 dead, 20 injured.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 01, 2015, 06:45:17 PM
Time for the Pres. And everyone else to blame the bad guns and not the lunatics doing the shooting. Don't blame the entertainment industry for the non stop violent films, or the over the top violent video games marketed to and sold to our kids.....definately don't blame the parents for allowing thier kids to watch or play those games. No, let's blame the guns....inanimate objects that can't operate unless a person makes it operate.


 I actually like Bernie Sanders response that he released on Facebook because he wasn't over the top 'take all the guns' and he specifically addressed the mental health issue. I think obamas response was typical of him and weak and the more I hear him speak on any subject the more I want to shove a screwdriver into my eardrums.

My question is......why aren't they reporting the race or religion of the shooter yet? I'm willing to bet they know. My SPECULATION is that it's not a white male or Christian so it doesn't behoove the media to report those aspects unless he was a white male Christian. Could be totally wrong.....just odd they are only saying 20 year old male.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Genowyn on October 01, 2015, 07:24:19 PM
To paraphrase the president though, (nearly) every country has those violent video games and movies, and yet the US is the only country to have shootings like this with such alarming frequency.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Dave_Manchester on October 01, 2015, 07:28:11 PM
No, let's blame the guns....inanimate objects that can't operate unless a person makes it operate.


Well it's worth taking a shot (!) at blaming the guns, since every other civilised member of the developed world has those exact same "violent movies" and "violent video games" you mention (incidentally DVDs and games are also "inanimate objects"), and which you are so keen to blame, and yet they don't blast the shit out of school children, college students, church goers and cinema goers on quite the regular basis your citizens do.

I (half-) jest, and I'd vowed never to post on here again, but what you wrote was the most self-contradictory and misguided nonsense I've read on here. "Guns are harmful only when used irresponsibly...so let's instead blame movies and video games!" Do you see the contradictory 'reasoning' here? This is such an absurd way to approach the problem. The issue is, yours is an extraordinarily violent nation and when you couple that with a backward attitude to mental health you get the kinds of repeated mass slaughters we have seen, and will see again with a near-monthly regularity.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on October 01, 2015, 07:48:36 PM
Link to an archive to a thread on a certain internet board that I'm actually not linking so I think this is okay.

https://archive.is/KJ1LD

But if the OP actually is the murderer and this is the response behind it...I don't even know what to say. Part of me isn't surprised, but it's a shame.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 01, 2015, 08:05:51 PM
No, let's blame the guns....inanimate objects that can't operate unless a person makes it operate.


Well it's worth taking a shot (!) at blaming the guns, since every other civilised member of the developed world has those exact same "violent movies" and "violent video games" you mention (incidentally DVDs and games are also "inanimate objects"), and which you are so keen to blame, and yet they don't blast the shit out of school children, college students, church goers and cinema goers on quite the regular basis your citizens do.

I (half-) jest, and I'd vowed never to post on here again, but what you wrote was the most self-contradictory and misguided nonsense I've read on here. "Guns are harmful only when used irresponsibly...so let's instead blame movies and video games!" Do you see the contradictory 'reasoning' here? This is such an absurd way to approach the problem. The issue is, yours is an extraordinarily violent nation and when you couple that with a backward attitude to mental health you get the kinds of repeated mass slaughters we have seen, and will see again with a near-monthly regularity.

thought about debating this a bit more with you but I don't think it's worth the time. nothing I would say would change your view and nothing you say will change mine. Incidents like this that happen in our culture shouldn't surprise this country when you consider the toxic soul crushing ingredients we are consistently feeding it. period.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 08:15:04 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 01, 2015, 08:19:20 PM
Reading that archive of the chat.  I don't know any of these terms.
Beta uprising
r9k
chads

I'm afraid to google them too.  Last thing I need is to get drawn into what seems to be some secret net society that plans rampages.

I was lost the entire time. What I gathered....could be wrong....was that the apparent shooter told a bunch of his buddies in that chat room what he was going to do. A couple of them told him he was a sissy and wouldn't do it.....some of them encouraged him and even gave him advice on what weapons to use and who to target....and then when he did it there were many of them that were happy and saying he was the man and a god and crap like that.

Was that what was going on there? very difficult to follow
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 08:24:49 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 08:35:43 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 01, 2015, 08:37:35 PM
Violent games and violent movies are probably not the problem or even really a small part of the problem.  I played *violent* video games.  I like violent dramas (Seven, Reservoir Dogs, etc), but it is more about the drama than the violence.  Probably why I've never cared for horror movies.

I played them as well and watched all the movies. I don't think they're THE problem.....just ingredients in the stew of problems.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on October 01, 2015, 08:56:59 PM
Relevant....

I distinctly remember an interview in a magazine with Jon Tardy (lead singer of Obituary), where he said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory, but not exaggerating) that he believed that *IF* someone were already "on the edge" of mental instability, that their music could be a driving force to pushing them over the edge.

Here's what I find fascinating about that statement.   Let's suppose for a moment that it's true.   What could you do about out?   Here you have a feasible hypothesis that violent music (and by extension, violent video games or whatever) is not harmful to most people and causes no problems in your ordinary average joe. But to someone who is "on the edge", and in fact may never hurt a fly in stable environment, is suddenly given a catalyst for his imbalance....   

I'm presenting this as a puzzle, but to be honest I don't think it has a solution.  (well...not in the current world anyway.   :angel: )
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 01, 2015, 08:59:28 PM
Shooter targeted Christians.....apparently he was a Nazi / IRA sympathizer. This may come off sounding bad but it's not meant to be....I'm relieved the shooter wasn't a black muslim targeting Christians.....I think that'd have added some unneeded strife into an already tumultuous political and social atmosphere.


https://nypost.com/2015/10/01/oregon-gunman-singled-out-christians-during-rampage/
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 09:01:54 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 01, 2015, 09:07:45 PM
I am beyond relieved this guy wasn't a Muslim. There'd be so much more blood in the coming weeks. That could spiral out of control very quickly.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 01, 2015, 09:14:30 PM
Obama's response was essentially that it shouldn't be so easy for people so deranged to buy guns. I'm pro-gun and tend to be supportive of gun ownership, but anybody who want's to criticize that sentiment isn't using their brain. Let's not misconstrue common fucking sense as liberal simplemindedness.


Relevant....

I distinctly remember an interview in a magazine with Jon Tardy (lead singer of Obituary), where he said (and I'm paraphrasing from memory, but not exaggerating) that he believed that *IF* someone were already "on the edge" of mental instability, that their music could be a driving force to pushing them over the edge.

Here's what I find fascinating about that statement.   Let's suppose for a moment that it's true.   What could you do about out?   Here you have a feasible hypothesis that violent music (and by extension, violent video games or whatever) is not harmful to most people and causes no problems in your ordinary average joe. But to someone who is "on the edge", and in fact may never hurt a fly in stable environment, is suddenly given a catalyst for his imbalance....   

I'm presenting this as a puzzle, but to be honest I don't think it has a solution.  (well...not in the current world anyway.   :angel: )
The solution is to stop being so damned spoiled and naive to think that we can eliminate every gun-toting crazoid from shooting a place up. Shit happens.


Violent games and violent movies are probably not the problem or even really a small part of the problem.  I played *violent* video games.  I like violent dramas (Seven, Reservoir Dogs, etc), but it is more about the drama than the violence.  Probably why I've never cared for horror movies.

I played them as well and watched all the movies. I don't think they're THE problem.....just ingredients in the stew of problems.
Quick and easy access to blowjobs would solve a large number of American problems. If I ran an HMO that'd be my first line of preventive care. Stress kills.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on October 01, 2015, 09:15:11 PM
Reading that archive of the chat.  I don't know any of these terms.
Beta uprising
r9k
chads

Beta - weak, self conscious guys that can't get girlfriends
r9k - a board on that particular website where all the neckbeards live
chads - a person that goes to bars to pick up chicks; commonly by blocking other dudes

It is fascinating. It's an entire culture separate from reality. I guess I'm still young enough to be able to decipher what they are all saying.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 09:27:57 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 01, 2015, 09:34:18 PM
Maybe kids are just more fucked up these days.  I used to dismiss that as "we had all our problems when I was a youth too", but reading that crap .... Nobody and I mean nobody talked like that.  People could do cruel things, but there seemed to be lines where enough people would say "whoa.  That's too far."  But nothing went as far as that chat.  Not even close.
I'm inclined to agree, but I think it's an inevitable consequence of a good thing. People like this asshole have always existed, but they tended to be isolated. Imagine if the most twisted guy in your high-school could connect with 200 people who felt just as he did. No matter how peculiar some idiot high scooler might be, there are hundreds more just like him somewhere in the world, willing to offer him all the encouragement they can muster. It sucks, but it's a facet of a world where everybody can communicate and connect, and I consider that a valuable thing.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 09:46:14 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 10:02:47 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on October 01, 2015, 10:09:30 PM
It predates John Hughes.    Didn't The Graduate make "stalking", "romantic"???
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on October 01, 2015, 10:18:20 PM
What a mess.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 10:20:14 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 01, 2015, 10:26:06 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on October 01, 2015, 10:27:49 PM
What a mess.

Yes.  You can't wrap your head around this stuff.  Trying to make sense of it just messes with your head.

The solutions will probably be worse than the problem.  I even see major problems with linking mental illness to gun permits.

It doesn't confuse me that much

(to be completely honest that was my "following this thread" post)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 02, 2015, 04:52:06 AM
Obama's response was essentially that it shouldn't be so easy for people so deranged to buy guns. I'm pro-gun and tend to be supportive of gun ownership, but anybody who want's to criticize that sentiment isn't using their brain. Let's not misconstrue common fucking sense as liberal simplemindedness.
This.  Nothing wrong whatsoever with his address.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 02, 2015, 06:33:57 AM
I'm also a gun owner and what is a rarity, I actually 100% agree with what Obama said. I own one hand gun which had 3 easy yet inconvenient hoops to jump through to get and a shotgun which all I needed was an ID. I'm not sure what the answer is but anything short of have a certified psychologist go over application or even a face to face interview you will never be able to stop these fucking cowards from getting guns. In my mind there are only 2 100% sure ways to eliminate mass shootings.

1. Get rid of every gun in the world (never going to happen).
2. Give a gun to every person over the age of 18. Require them to take a class (ala getting your driver's license). May be a little old west but the mass shootings would end. (Also never going to happen)

From a school perspective every single place of education should have an armed guard(s) and metal detectors at the entrance every day. This could easily be funded by the government if we stopped wasting money arming people who will probably be our enemies in 20 years in the middle east. It's unfortunate, but I know I would feel a lot safer sending my kid to school knowing there was more security.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 06:47:55 AM
I'm also a gun owner and what is a rarity, I actually 100% agree with what Obama said. I own one hand gun which had 3 easy yet inconvenient hoops to jump through to get and a shotgun which all I needed was an ID. I'm not sure what the answer is but anything short of have a certified psychologist go over application or even a face to face interview you will never be able to stop these fucking cowards from getting guns. In my mind there are only 2 100% sure ways to eliminate mass shootings.

1. Get rid of every gun in the world (never going to happen).
2. Give a gun to every person over the age of 18. Require them to take a class (ala getting your driver's license). May be a little old west but the mass shootings would end. (Also never going to happen)


The thing that no politician will ever say is that there is no answer. This is one of the drawbacks of having the most complex machine in nature controlling our bodies. We are subject to emotion and unpredictable chemical imbalances. We could somehow magically make every gun on the face of the Earth disappear, and we could throw all the research, money, studies, laws, and professional opinions that we can at it, and we'll never stop this behavior. Even if guns disappeared, people would just start running through classrooms with machetes or start using crude pipe bombs instead. Maybe in a perfect world I'll be proven wrong and guns will really no longer exist, but I'd be willing to bet just about anything that the neurological disorder of wanting to precipitate mass death will still be there.

I really wish people would start discussing this issue within the boundaries of reality. I see Facebook comment threads filled with people who actually believe we are one day going to get rid of all firearms, or be able to psychologically screen every gun user with 100% accuracy. The are living in a dream world. They ultimate goal here is not to eliminate these events completely. While that'd be amazing, we might as well say we are going to land humans on the sun six months from now. Thinking that way prevents the discussion from ever yielding a plausible solution. We need a way to minimize how often these types of events occur. That's all we can do. Pretending we'll be able to eliminate it is a lie and is misleading on the politicians' end when addressing the American people. In the case of guns, I truly believe that if a quarter of a college campus' students were legally carrying, you'd see way fewer of these incidents. This is a perfect example of why declaring a school a gun free zone is completely retarded.

Shooters know that they have at least 2-3 (usually more like 5-8) minutes before opposition (cops) arrives. They can get off a lot of rounds in that time. If three or four students in that classroom were legally carrying, this guy's damage may have been contained to just a few fatalities rather than 10, possibly zero if you had someone with a quick draw.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kirksnosehair on October 02, 2015, 07:10:31 AM
I believe there is...let's call it a "middle ground" - and that would look something like this:


There is an incredibly high degree of consensus on these three items across the political spectrum:
https://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm


Those are RECENT polls.


Let's at least do the stuff we all agree on.  It's a start.  We can't just keep telling ourselves this is the price of living in a free society.   We can do better. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 02, 2015, 07:26:40 AM
And CNN shows it's true colors again. What is the point of showing a graph of how many deaths there have been from guns and from terrorism if not to push an agenda? Pathetic. A quick Bing search shows that more people have died in car accidents since 2004. It proves nothing.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/index.html

Also, these mass shooting make national news but even in a smaller city like Omaha, there is rarely a day that goes by without a story in the morning about somebody being shot due to gang violence. Look at the murder rate in Chicago and Baltimore. I'm guessing that the majority of those murders were done by people who got their hands on guns illegally.

As per the OP, I do think that mass shootings are increasing due to media coverage. I don't need see this coward's face on all of my news apps. These assholes are either starved for attention or want to spread their personal agenda.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 07:31:25 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L4c6oGsHioo/UREfgeR2qSI/AAAAAAAAAHk/GoTTru1DdDY/s1600/AR-15+&+Mini-14.png)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 02, 2015, 07:46:22 AM
I believe there is...let's call it a "middle ground" - and that would look something like this:


  • Ban ALL assault weapon sales to citizens.  No one NEEDS an AK47. 
  • Require certification of a recent psychological examination before approving ANY gun sale ANYWHERE
  • Close ALL of the current loop holes (Gun Show sales, etc).
There is an incredibly high degree of consensus on these three items across the political spectrum:
https://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm


Those are RECENT polls.


Let's at least do the stuff we all agree on.  It's a start.  We can't just keep telling ourselves this is the price of living in a free society.   We can do better.

I agree with all of those in general. As far as the assault rifles go....I look at it like a fisherman who has a pole for every situation or a car enthusiast who owns a bunch of different types of cars. 99 out of 100 of the gun enthusiast's who own and collect those types of guns are no threat to anyone. It's just collecting. How those end up in the wrong hands can and should be addressed but I don't see how you deny the majority of law abiding folks that right to own them due to the actions of a tiny fraction of crazies.

 My only concern about the Psychological Certificate is 'who' is issuing those? That seems like an avenue that can easily be exploited and abused.....very easy to grant or deny a permit due to one persons opinion. If it were a Board Review of some sort....12 people majority rules (like a jury) then I'd be more comfortable....but heck, just taking myself as an example....I'm an alcoholic with addiction tendencies who was sexually abused for a year by an older male when I was 9. What the heck would a psychologist say about me after an hour in the chair? I could easily envision a 'DENIED' coming across the table despite being mentally fit. I don't know the answer but absolutely acknowledge that 'something' has to be done. Just don't think it's the extreme ends of each camp.

 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 02, 2015, 07:57:31 AM
And CNN shows it's true colors again. What is the point of showing a graph of how many deaths there have been from guns and from terrorism if not to push an agenda? Pathetic. A quick Bing search shows that more people have died in car accidents since 2004. It proves nothing.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/index.html

Also, these mass shooting make national news but even in a smaller city like Omaha, there is rarely a day that goes by without a story in the morning about somebody being shot due to gang violence. Look at the murder rate in Chicago and Baltimore. I'm guessing that the majority of those murders were done by people who got their hands on guns illegally.

As per the OP, I do think that mass shootings are increasing due to media coverage. I don't need see this coward's face on all of my news apps. These assholes are either starved for attention or want to spread their personal agenda.

They're literally showing the graph Obama mentions in the video. Obama is obviously pushing a political agenda - he's a politician,  but I don't see how this is on CNN.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 08:16:17 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 08:18:27 AM
I've read that he had four handguns and a rifle.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kirksnosehair on October 02, 2015, 08:18:38 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?

(https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-L4c6oGsHioo/UREfgeR2qSI/AAAAAAAAAHk/GoTTru1DdDY/s1600/AR-15+&+Mini-14.png)


I don't live in a vacuum, dude.  I'm fully aware of this.  You're setting up a false choice.  I'm saying nobody needs ASSAULT WEAPONS.  Never mind the AK.  Ban fucking assault weapon sales to citizens.  It's not that complicated.  A hunting rifle is not an assault weapon.  It's a hunting rifle.  An assault weapon is not a hunting rifle.  It's an assault weapon.  Let's stop all of the silly semantics games and obfuscation for a change.  (I'm not referring to you specifically, Chino, but your post is the first frame in a movie we've seen a million times). 


Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 08:20:50 AM
Based on what criteria? Cosmetics?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 02, 2015, 08:24:38 AM
And CNN shows it's true colors again. What is the point of showing a graph of how many deaths there have been from guns and from terrorism if not to push an agenda? Pathetic. A quick Bing search shows that more people have died in car accidents since 2004. It proves nothing.

https://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-shooting-terrorism-gun-violence/index.html

Also, these mass shooting make national news but even in a smaller city like Omaha, there is rarely a day that goes by without a story in the morning about somebody being shot due to gang violence. Look at the murder rate in Chicago and Baltimore. I'm guessing that the majority of those murders were done by people who got their hands on guns illegally.

As per the OP, I do think that mass shootings are increasing due to media coverage. I don't need see this coward's face on all of my news apps. These assholes are either starved for attention or want to spread their personal agenda.

They're literally showing the graph Obama mentions in the video. Obama is obviously pushing a political agenda - he's a politician,  but I don't see how this is on CNN.

The article made it sound like the CNN reporter did the research.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 08:25:40 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?

*snip*


I don't live in a vacuum, dude.  I'm fully aware of this.  You're setting up a false choice.  I'm saying nobody needs ASSAULT WEAPONS.  Never mind the AK.  Ban fucking assault weapon sales to citizens.  It's not that complicated.  A hunting rifle is not an assault weapon.  It's a hunting rifle.  An assault weapon is not a hunting rifle.  It's an assault weapon.  Let's stop all of the silly semantics games and obfuscation for a change.  (I'm not referring to you specifically, Chino, but your post is the first frame in a movie we've seen a million times).

But the point is, if it's not a fully automatic weapon, an assault rifle and hunting rifle are literally the same thing. They are just finished differently. Think of it like an Acura MDX and a Honda Pilot. They look completely different, but if you removed the body they are practically the exact same automobile.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 08:29:22 AM
I don't live in a vacuum, dude.  I'm fully aware of this.  You're setting up a false choice.  I'm saying nobody needs ASSAULT WEAPONS.  Never mind the AK.  Ban fucking assault weapon sales to citizens.  It's not that complicated.  A hunting rifle is not an assault weapon.  It's a hunting rifle.  An assault weapon is not a hunting rifle.  It's an assault weapon.  Let's stop all of the silly semantics games and obfuscation for a change.  (I'm not referring to you specifically, Chino, but your post is the first frame in a movie we've seen a million times).

Also, for the record, this is the same gun that lit up sandy hook.

(https://photos.gunsamerica.com/d/12147-1/ambush-rifles-68-spc-ar-15-style-hunting-rifles-sean.jpg)
(https://img577.imageshack.us/img577/5277/buckw308ar02.jpg)
(https://www.h2tuga.net/assets/fullimage/hunting-with-ar-15-rifles-2lmpmua1b9e44trz.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Nekov on October 02, 2015, 08:30:20 AM
The thing that no politician will ever say is that there is no answer.

As many people here have noted, this is an issue that happens specifically in the US, so there clearly has to be an answer as to why this happens there and not in the rest of the world. I think finding an answer is possible, it just takes time and money which no one is willing to spend.There's obviously a mix of things, culture, education, race, laws, etc that make the US the number 1 at these kinds of things but every time this happens the talk goes immediately towards gun ownership so there's no talk about what the real issue is.
Should there be more controls for buying guns? Probably but that still doesn't guarantee anything. Someone could be perfectly fine and pass a psychological test in order to buy a gun but a year later have some stressful situations that makes that person's brain snap.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kirksnosehair on October 02, 2015, 08:32:14 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.


I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.


If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something


I think we can enact better gun laws that will provide better protection to the general public from these monsters, and make it much more difficult for a person with mental health issues to get their hands on guns. 


And again, we have broad consensus on this.  I'm saying we should act on that consensus while we have it and while this is all fresh in the public discourse again, or....we can talk about it again next month when the next massacre happens, I guess  :|
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 08:36:49 AM
The thing that no politician will ever say is that there is no answer.

As many people here have noted, this is an issue that happens specifically in the US

Yes, if we are referring to gun related massacres. But the drive to inflict harm on many people at once still persists in countries that don't have a gun inventory comparable to the US. Chinese citizens have wicked restrictions on who can have a gun and why, and therefore, knives are the weapon of choice over there.

Death toll rises to 33 in knife attack on China train station
https://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/02/gang-knife-wielding-men-in-deadly-attacks-on-china-train-station/

Knife wielding man goes on rampage in Chinese school (This one actually happened the same day as Sandy Hook. 22 students stabbed)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9744671/Knife-wielding-man-goes-on-rampage-in-Chinese-school.html

We could solve the gun problem by somehow circumventing the constitution and magically destroying all guns, but the wanting to kill problem will always remain.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 08:39:17 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.


I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.


If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something


I think we can enact better gun laws that will provide better protection to the general public from these monsters, and make it much more difficult for a person with mental health issues to get their hands on guns. 


And again, we have broad consensus on this.  I'm saying we should act on that consensus while we have it and while this is all fresh in the public discourse again, or....we can talk about it again next month when the next massacre happens, I guess  :|
I'm all for passing sane gun control legislation. I just don't think a law prohibiting guns from looking scary qualifies. Beside which, passing laws just because you can and want to do something, anything, is never a good idea. Enact laws because they're smart, not because they're passable.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Nekov on October 02, 2015, 08:53:13 AM
The thing that no politician will ever say is that there is no answer.

As many people here have noted, this is an issue that happens specifically in the US

Yes, if we are referring to gun related massacres. But the drive to inflict harm on many people at once still persists in countries that don't have a gun inventory comparable to the US. Chinese citizens have wicked restrictions on who can have a gun and why, and therefore, knives are the weapon of choice over there.

Death toll rises to 33 in knife attack on China train station
https://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/03/02/gang-knife-wielding-men-in-deadly-attacks-on-china-train-station/

Knife wielding man goes on rampage in Chinese school (This one actually happened the same day as Sandy Hook. 22 students stabbed)
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/9744671/Knife-wielding-man-goes-on-rampage-in-Chinese-school.html

We could solve the gun problem by somehow circumventing the constitution and magically destroying all guns, but the wanting to kill problem will always remain.

Which is why in my post I clearly stated that the real issue are not the guns  ;)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kirksnosehair on October 02, 2015, 08:55:05 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.


I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.


If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something


I think we can enact better gun laws that will provide better protection to the general public from these monsters, and make it much more difficult for a person with mental health issues to get their hands on guns. 


And again, we have broad consensus on this.  I'm saying we should act on that consensus while we have it and while this is all fresh in the public discourse again, or....we can talk about it again next month when the next massacre happens, I guess  :|
I'm all for passing sane gun control legislation. I just don't think a law prohibiting guns from looking scary qualifies. Beside which, passing laws just because you can and want to do something, anything, is never a good idea. Enact laws because they're smart, not because they're passable.


Well, then I guess it's a good thing I am not in favor of banning guns for "looking scary" - that's not what I wrote and that's not what I mean, and you know that.  I said no average citizen needs an assault rifle. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 09:09:53 AM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.


I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.


If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something


I think we can enact better gun laws that will provide better protection to the general public from these monsters, and make it much more difficult for a person with mental health issues to get their hands on guns. 


And again, we have broad consensus on this.  I'm saying we should act on that consensus while we have it and while this is all fresh in the public discourse again, or....we can talk about it again next month when the next massacre happens, I guess  :|
I'm all for passing sane gun control legislation. I just don't think a law prohibiting guns from looking scary qualifies. Beside which, passing laws just because you can and want to do something, anything, is never a good idea. Enact laws because they're smart, not because they're passable.


Well, then I guess it's a good thing I am not in favor of banning guns for "looking scary" - that's not what I wrote and that's not what I mean, and you know that.  I said no average citizen needs an assault rifle.

But what an average citizens declares as an assault rifle, a hunter calls a hunting rifle.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 09:12:38 AM


I don't live in a vacuum, dude.  I'm fully aware of this.  You're setting up a false choice.  I'm saying nobody needs ASSAULT WEAPONS.  Never mind the AK.  Ban fucking assault weapon sales to citizens.  It's not that complicated.  A hunting rifle is not an assault weapon.  It's a hunting rifle.  An assault weapon is not a hunting rifle.  It's an assault weapon.  Let's stop all of the silly semantics games and obfuscation for a change.  (I'm not referring to you specifically, Chino, but your post is the first frame in a movie we've seen a million times).

You actually had me (which is rare) up to the "no one needs...".  At that point I tuned out, because who gets to decide that?  You?  No thanks.   The Government?  No fucking thanks.   The majority? Uh, I'd rather let the government decide than the group of people that has deemed Honey Boo-boo 'entertainment'.  "Need" is not the question.

The question is, how do we reign in the tools that we have deemed "good for society" so that they are actually "good".  What most people fail to realize is that we're ALL hypocrites in this endeavor.  We like the internet when it justifies our thinking - I'm a DT fan?  Let's congregate on a site and talk DT incessantly! - and when it furthers our agenda - I'm gender fluid?  Let's congregate on a site and talk about fluid gender, till people are so numbed by the possibilities that it's accepted as "normal".   Not suggesting that this is necessarily wrong, but honestly, how can we blame these kids?  They wake up in the morning and they have a thought or a feeling that is not in keeping with the "normies" and what do they do?   They congregate with like-minded people until there is critical mass, and something happens.   Like Fish says in "The Perception of Johnny Punter", something's gonna happen.

We're teaching our kids on a constant, daily basis that the rules don't apply to them.  That they don't have to subscribe to "normal".  And while that's all well and good when it comes to wearing a t-shirt or getting a guage, it doesn't wash when we're talking more substantive issues.   We've got volumes and volumes of anecdotal evidence of a kid getting 'wronged' at school and having a parent come in and make it all right for Johnny or Joannie, burying bad deeds and papering over failure, but what about the kid that doesn't have that relationship with their parents?  They have to take matters into their own hands.  And what's the best way of making a splash?  It used to be getting a guitar, it's certainly NOT acing that science experiment... no, it's getting on TV.  Eyeballs.  Going viral.

Banning guns is not going to solve the problem, it is only going to change the problem.  You might as well try to ban the interwebs.

I wish I knew more about the internet and how it works; it would be interesting to know if there was a reasonable way for all those "Anonymous's" to spend a week or two contemplating their actions, and realizing that there is no "anonymous" when it comes to the consequences of our actions.  Better yet, hold those that egged him on as accomplices. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 09:30:37 AM
I wish I knew more about the internet and how it works; it would be interesting to know if there was a reasonable way for all those "Anonymous's" to spend a week or two contemplating their actions, and realizing that there is no "anonymous" when it comes to the consequences of our actions.  Better yet, hold those that egged him on as accomplices.

This I agree with fully. Reading his thread last night was making me sick. Every person in there should be considered an accomplice and should be charged accordingly. I know those kind of posts happen all the time on that website, but too bad. People should be reporting every single one of those to the police as they come up. Let the OP be investigated and then charge him simply for making the threats, regardless of whether or not he intended to actually carry a violent act out. Joking or not, there should be a zero tolerance policy for that kind of shit.

How the owners of that site can let the community behave that way and keep a clean conscious is beyond me.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 09:33:40 AM

Well, then I guess it's a good thing I am not in favor of banning guns for "looking scary" - that's not what I wrote and that's not what I mean, and you know that.  I said no average citizen needs an assault rifle.
Actually I don't know that since you didn't answer the "based on what criteria" question. The only things that differentiate an assault rifle from a hunting rifle are cosmetic. Do you think there is any functional difference at all between the two rifles in Chino's picture? Would you ban the hunting rifle?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 09:38:38 AM
I wish I knew more about the internet and how it works; it would be interesting to know if there was a reasonable way for all those "Anonymous's" to spend a week or two contemplating their actions, and realizing that there is no "anonymous" when it comes to the consequences of our actions.  Better yet, hold those that egged him on as accomplices.

This I agree with fully. Reading his thread last night was making me sick. Every person in there should be considered an accomplice and should be charged accordingly. I know those kind of posts happen all the time on that website, but too bad. People should be reporting every single one of those to the police as they come up. Let the OP be investigated and then charge him simply for making the threats, regardless of whether or not he intended to actually carry a violent act out. Joking or not, there should be a zero tolerance policy for that kind of shit.

How the owners of that site can let the community behave that way and keep a clean conscious is beyond me.
Terrible precedent. And is the forum still active (I'm sure it's not). I'd be curious to know if the people in there reacted with "wow, awesome, he actually went through with it!", or "holy shit, I never thought he'd go through with it. What a dick."
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: RuRoRul on October 02, 2015, 09:59:10 AM
I wish I knew more about the internet and how it works; it would be interesting to know if there was a reasonable way for all those "Anonymous's" to spend a week or two contemplating their actions, and realizing that there is no "anonymous" when it comes to the consequences of our actions.  Better yet, hold those that egged him on as accomplices.

This I agree with fully. Reading his thread last night was making me sick. Every person in there should be considered an accomplice and should be charged accordingly. I know those kind of posts happen all the time on that website, but too bad. People should be reporting every single one of those to the police as they come up. Let the OP be investigated and then charge him simply for making the threats, regardless of whether or not he intended to actually carry a violent act out. Joking or not, there should be a zero tolerance policy for that kind of shit.

How the owners of that site can let the community behave that way and keep a clean conscious is beyond me.
Terrible precedent. And is the forum still active (I'm sure it's not). I'd be curious to know if the people in there reacted with "wow, awesome, he actually went through with it!", or "holy shit, I never thought he'd go through with it. What a dick."
It was still active after it at least. From the link Implode posted here to an archive of it, someone bumped the thread obviously after the event with "holy fukk" or something along those lines, followed by "Wow he did it" then a bunch of generic meme / joke replies. The sentiment was definitely the former, imo, rather than the latter, you can judge for yourself if you want to decide (the link is just to an archive of it, not to the actual forum).

Link to an archive to a thread on a certain internet board that I'm actually not linking so I think this is okay.

https://archive.is/KJ1LD

But if the OP actually is the murderer and this is the response behind it...I don't even know what to say. Part of me isn't surprised, but it's a shame.

I agree Chino. Reading that thread is pretty sick, but it's actually not at all surprising. Stuff like that (not this exactly, but just the general atmosphere where a thread like that would be expected) is why I have long since made sure never to go onto that site for any reason, even though familiarity with it seems to be considered to give you a bit of "internet cred". Anywhere where spamming child porn is
considered routine is not worth visiting under any circumstances imo.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 10:03:03 AM

I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.

If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something

Kirk, some of our conversations have been testy, but please give me the benefit of the doubt this one time:  I'm asking a serious, good faith question and not attacking you or your position politically:

Why?   Why enact it "just because we have the political will"?  If we don't think it will work (and even with the 'political will', we both seem to agree there is no concensus that it will work, and I believe there is evidence that shows it won't) why is that the rationale?   Again, this isn't "political", because I am licensed (or was) to carry and so politically inclined to disagree with gun control, but I am ok with all of your proposals if there is a legitimate and compelling purpose for limiting the rights we have.  But can you see - not "agree", but accept - that "because we can" shouldn't be a rationale for anything (republican, democratic or bipartisan)?  As a general proposition, we shouldn't be passing things because the temperature is right at that moment in time.

Not only does passing a bunch of laws that don't work chill the next time (it effectively raises the bar for what we'll pass next time) it further erodes the confidence the American people have in their leadership on both sides of the aisle.   I would guess you're not the biggest fan of The Patriot Act, but even as a (moderate) supporter of (parts of) that bill, I'm of the opinion it is pretty clear that was passed "because we can", and by people who "didn't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut" how effective it would be? 

Again, I mean this in good faith, and not to trick you or bait you.  I'm not really interested in snarky sarcasm; we've got other less immediate threads/discussions for that, where we can spar to our hearts content.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 10:16:17 AM
I agree Chino. Reading that thread is pretty sick, but it's actually not at all surprising. Stuff like that (not this exactly, but just the general atmosphere where a thread like that would be expected) is why I have long since made sure never to go onto that site for any reason, even though familiarity with it seems to be considered to give you a bit of "internet cred". Anywhere where spamming child porn is
considered routine is not worth visiting under any circumstances imo.

But this is what I was alluding to in my post.  When the shit with DT and MP went down, there was another site (and long time participants here will be able to figure out what the site was) that was just unconscionable in the way it handled the discourse.  Hateful, anti-Semitic, racist, and even, at times, alleging sexual acts that in every jurisdiction I know of would be obscene or illegal, and yet it was treated as a "joke" and anyone who wasn't down, or who made any kind of attempt to reign it in was lumped in and attacked with the same vigor.  I seriously at one point thought about making a call to the FBI about one person, and thought better of it (it wasn't as if the security of the nation was at stake, and if MP didn't make the move, it wasn't up to me), but it was pretty extreme. 

I don't know how that turned into the definition of "bad ass".  Used to be you scuffle a little bit, maybe you land a couple punches, and it was done.  One winner, one loser, but no one dead, and maybe the worst was a hole in your jeans.  Now it's just... unreal, and while in the past it was limited to "anonymous" and over and done, now it's spilling into the real world.  We've always sort of clung to the idea that we "let it go" unless and until it hurt someone; well, now it is.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 10:42:02 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on October 02, 2015, 10:44:40 AM
The interesting thing about that site and thread is that it's obviously so removed from reality. When people in the thread were telling the OP to do it, saying "ABSOLUTE MADMAN", and even just posting to for the sake of "Stupid meme.  Don't use that anymore.," I don't think they are typing as themselves. It's almost like an act, like they are typing or choosing what to type based on how it'll look to another reader for entertainment vs what they really feel. That's a big part of modern Internet humor. All those posters are acting like they are in on the joke as it were.

I'm not saying that excuses them; I agree they should be held accountable. But the many years of posting and doing things for the lulz  (or keks nowadays) have made them forget how these things have irl consequences. I doubt most of the users would go out and shoot people, but when they go on that site, it's like a game. They lose all sense of the real world.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 10:47:54 AM
The interesting thing about that site and thread is that it's obviously so removed from reality. When people in the thread were telling the OP to do it, saying "ABSOLUTE MADMAN", and even just posting to for the sake of "Stupid meme.  Don't use that anymore.," I don't think they are typing as themselves. It's almost like an act, like they are typing or choosing what to type based on how it'll look to another reader for entertainment vs what they really feel. That's a big part of modern Internet humor. All those posters are acting like they are in on the joke as it were.

I'm not saying that excuses them; I agree they should be held accountable. But the many years of posting and doing things for the lulz  (or keks nowadays) have made them forget how these things have irl consequences. I doubt most of the users would go out and shoot people, but when they go on that site, it's like a game. They lose all sense of the real world.

But here's the thing, though: it only takes one, and we all have stories of varying degrees where someone did something and someone else was like "well, I didn't think he'd actually DO it!".   Remember in high school, everyone talked about blow jobs like they were bubble gum, but who really got one?  Then there was the one girl who DID.  And she was legend.   It's the same human brain, it's how things work.   It's all a joke until, well, it's not. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 02, 2015, 11:01:46 AM
As somebody else said, we have to be careful about how they are administered.  It should be regulated to have the test, but actual professionals outside of politics should come up with the testing.  I could definitely see abuse of that system.

That was me.....and I really have a hard time envisioning that process not becoming influenced by outside forces, or ones own beliefs. The Supreme court Justices are a prime example. They are supposed to strictly interpret the law and Constitution but to say their political leanings haven't influenced their decisions would be intellectually dishonest. I don't see how a Mental exam to decide whether you deserve to own a gun, administered by another person....would escape those same human tendencies. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 02, 2015, 11:24:01 AM
I'm getting really irritated by the "This is an American problem and my country doesn't have this problem so do something about it bullshit". As it's been said this is not a gun problem (ala China and their Knife Crimes) it's people wanting to kill people problem. The bigger the population the high percentage of these assholes there are going to be. There are almost 321 MILLION people in the US compared to the UK with a whopping 64 million.

To me the solution is not gun control. It will never happen. As sad as it is to say mass killings will never stop. Take away guns and someone will build a bomb or knife or a car. We as a society need to come to the realization that this is not a problem to be solved by politicians but a problem to be solved in our homes and schools. What is happening in these kid's lives that make them want to do this? Let's figure out a way to identify these people. Let's increase security at every school (armed guard(s), metal detectors, etc.). I firmly believe that this is not an issue with guns but an issue with society and people.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 11:26:12 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Nekov on October 02, 2015, 11:28:54 AM
As somebody else said, we have to be careful about how they are administered.  It should be regulated to have the test, but actual professionals outside of politics should come up with the testing.  I could definitely see abuse of that system.

That was me.....and I really have a hard time envisioning that process not becoming influenced by outside forces, or ones own beliefs. The Supreme court Justices are a prime example. They are supposed to strictly interpret the law and Constitution but to say their political leanings haven't influenced their decisions would be intellectually dishonest. I don't see how a Mental exam to decide whether you deserve to own a gun, administered by another person....would escape those same human tendencies. 
Well, obviously the test should be administered by a professional psychiatrist who could determine if a person has a tendency towards violence and stuff like that. If it is done that way i don't see how the process could be influenced by politics, I mean, we trust those kind of professionals in court to determine whether a defendant should go to jail or to a mental facility, why wouldn't we trust them to determine whether someone is fit to own a gun or not?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 11:39:41 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 11:44:49 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 11:52:46 AM
I mean, we trust those kind of professionals in court to determine whether a defendant should go to jail or to a mental facility, why wouldn't we trust them to determine whether someone is fit to own a gun or not?
Because you could have reasons on both sides of the equation.

Take the medical marijuana prescriptions.  Now picture somebody that has the underlying motive that gun access should be unrestricted.

Then the flip side where somebody feels all guns should be banned, so they fail just about everybody.

Also, if I were the Dr., I'd be a little nervous being the deciding factor. If I deny that someone is mentally fit to possess a weapon, what's to stop them from seeking revenge on me?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 02, 2015, 11:59:56 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/probe-in-college-slayings-peers-into-web-rants-and-possible-religious-rage/2015/10/02/d250007a-68ea-11e5-8325-a42b5a459b1e_story.html

Shooter wrote the following to a blog just after the news crew was shot live.

Quote
“On an interesting note, I have noticed that so many people like him are all alone and unknown, yet when they spill a little blood, the whole world knows who they are”

Quote
“A man who was known by no one, is now known by everyone, his face splashed across every screen, his name across the lips of every person on the planet, all in the course of one day. Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight.”
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 12:06:20 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on October 02, 2015, 12:12:48 PM
I mean, we trust those kind of professionals in court to determine whether a defendant should go to jail or to a mental facility, why wouldn't we trust them to determine whether someone is fit to own a gun or not?
Because you could have reasons on both sides of the equation.

Take the medical marijuana prescriptions.  Now picture somebody that has the underlying motive that gun access should be unrestricted.

Then the flip side where somebody feels all guns should be banned, so they fail just about everybody.

Also, if I were the Dr., I'd be a little nervous being the deciding factor. If I deny that someone is mentally fit to possess a weapon, what's to stop them from seeking revenge on me?

They could make the questioning session anonymous, like behind a screen or something, with no names given. Kind of creepy, but it'd work
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 12:13:55 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 02, 2015, 12:16:32 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 12:24:22 PM
I'm not saying that excuses them; I agree they should be held accountable. But the many years of posting and doing things for the lulz  (or keks nowadays) have made them forget how these things have irl consequences. I doubt most of the users would go out and shoot people, but when they go on that site, it's like a game. They lose all sense of the real world.

It doesn't excuse them.  The places I visit (such as here) have joking, but when somebody starts saying something like "wish they'd die" or "go kill yourself", there's always somebody that posts "dude, not cool" and they usually are backed up.  People have a line.  And even if they get caught up in something and say something like "glad that bitch got cancer", it is a moment of exaggeration that is met with disapproval.

There were some saying "don't do it" in that room, but they were greatly outnumbered.  Some even shouted down/out.  And some were saying don't do it, not because they were worried about actual human lives, but because it would hurt their cause.  Sorry, but f'd up is sometimes just f'd up.

The most disturbing comments were not just "do it", but the recommendations on how to do it.  I have no problem considering that an accomplice.

It's Hef.  Someone says "brah, glock up your lolz and rawk the normies", we need Hef to step in and say "Take a week and think about that again."

Seriously, though, we talk a lot about the polarization of things, and the partisanship of things, and to me it's all the same thing.  We have gone so far in the other direction of trying to please everyone by placating their feelings and justifying their opinions, that we've gotten to the point that we can't really have that conversation on a macro level.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 02, 2015, 12:28:28 PM

To me the solution is not gun control. It will never happen.

You're the second person to that say, and frankly, I don't have your confidence.   I think in this day and age of knee-jerk, "faux-common-sense" based legislation predicated on the idea that "we have to do SOMETHING even if it doesn't actually work", it can absolutely happen.

And we'll continue to have threads like these, we'll continue to count the bodies...

Read Mr. Mercedes by Stephen King if you need any insight into how bad it can get.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Nekov on October 02, 2015, 12:50:39 PM
I mean, we trust those kind of professionals in court to determine whether a defendant should go to jail or to a mental facility, why wouldn't we trust them to determine whether someone is fit to own a gun or not?
Because you could have reasons on both sides of the equation.

Take the medical marijuana prescriptions.  Now picture somebody that has the underlying motive that gun access should be unrestricted.

Then the flip side where somebody feels all guns should be banned, so they fail just about everybody.

Also, if I were the Dr., I'd be a little nervous being the deciding factor. If I deny that someone is mentally fit to possess a weapon, what's to stop them from seeking revenge on me?

They could make the questioning session anonymous, like behind a screen or something, with no names given. Kind of creepy, but it'd work

I'm pretty sure any good test requires the doctor to be able to see how the patient reacts and not only hear what he's saying.

Also, this line of reasoning is just wrong, this is how the mob gets away with stuff. Plus, psychiatrist know they deal with potentially dangerous people on a daily basis, if you chose that line of work you know what you are dealing with.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TL on October 02, 2015, 01:36:03 PM
One thing that needs to happen during these incidents, is that the media need to stop giving so much attention to the assailant. I'm not saying a complete blackout on their name or any details, but at least don't focus on that. Don't have the idiot's face all over your screen for hours on end. Don't spend hours on air digging into their past and speculating about their motives. Instead of using their name frequently, mostly refer to them with nondescript terms. To put it simply, don't give them so much attention.
If shooters aren't given such a reliable spotlight, you would probably see fewer incidents.

Unfortunately, with the American news media the way it is, there's very little chance of that happening.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kirksnosehair on October 02, 2015, 03:43:25 PM
@Kirk

It's already illegal to have an AK-47 that's automatic (I think Texas allows them). To own one you need to have a modified bolt that allows it to only fire in semi-auto mode. At that point it's no different than the hunting rifles people use for large game (probably less lethal actually). Do you make hunting rifles illegal too?


I think assault weapons are legal in most states. Also, the mini 14 probably has the same action; it'll be semi-auto right out of the box. Ones is just made to be scary looking.

Also, I suspect the guy would have had a much harder time sneaking either of those into his classroom, and it would have exposed him to far greater risk of being caught before he could have gone off. It would also be much harder to wield and defend if he faced resistance from some of the students. This knucklehead probably used a handgun or two because it's better suited for what he wanted to do; I would have. Assault weapon bans really are just feel good legislation.


I think you missed my point, or I probably failed to make it clearly enough.  What I'm saying is let's enact gun safety legislation that we currently have the political will to enact.  This is the kind of thing that has to happen incrementally over time.  I would just like to see a START to some political/social policy movement in the right direction.  Check out the link I posted above.  Look at the consensus surrounding Assault weapon bans (one small facet of what I'm trying to articulate here), universal background checks and even some kind of psychological testing/screening in order to be able to buy ANY gun.


If we've got that kind of consensus we should act.   Doing something is better than doing nothing.  All great accomplishments start with a single initial step.  All I'm saying is we should capitalize on the resurgent public discourse on guns to get some of these things passed.  I don't give a flying fuck at a rolling donut how effective it is, at least initially.  I'm more interested right now in getting a few of these laws enacted because it's kind of like inertia.  Look at what happened with gay marriage.  20 years ago if I said gay marriage would be the law of the land by 2015 most people would have called me crazy, stupid, naive or all of the above.   It began with one state.  I'm proud to be from that state, because I think we're on the right side of history on this.  But the larger point is it began with one liberal New England state and it really didn't take all that long to get SCOTUS on board.  THAT is what I'm saying.  We've got to start with something


I think we can enact better gun laws that will provide better protection to the general public from these monsters, and make it much more difficult for a person with mental health issues to get their hands on guns. 


And again, we have broad consensus on this.  I'm saying we should act on that consensus while we have it and while this is all fresh in the public discourse again, or....we can talk about it again next month when the next massacre happens, I guess  :|
I'm all for passing sane gun control legislation. I just don't think a law prohibiting guns from looking scary qualifies. Beside which, passing laws just because you can and want to do something, anything, is never a good idea. Enact laws because they're smart, not because they're passable.


Again, you're missing my point but it's become clear now that you're doing so intentionally so I'm gonna go ahead and hit the road.  I stayed away from here for a few months, now I remember why.






Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 02, 2015, 05:59:00 PM
Wow. That was unexpected, and somewhat baffling.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 03, 2015, 12:20:19 AM
One thing that needs to happen during these incidents, is that the media need to stop giving so much attention to the assailant. I'm not saying a complete blackout on their name or any details, but at least don't focus on that. Don't have the idiot's face all over your screen for hours on end. Don't spend hours on air digging into their past and speculating about their motives. Instead of using their name frequently, mostly refer to them with nondescript terms. To put it simply, don't give them so much attention.
If shooters aren't given such a reliable spotlight, you would probably see fewer incidents.

Unfortunately, with the American news media the way it is, there's very little chance of that happening.

I agree with this. And it's possible I just have my head in the sand, but I genuinely don't know his name. Or seen his picture. But I do know the name of Chris Mintz who was shot 7 times  (and survived) while rushing the shooter and helping get his attention off others. That is genuine progress.

Reminds me of this, which I love.
https://youtu.be/-LGHtc_D328
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: MrBoom_shack-a-lack on October 03, 2015, 03:43:25 AM
Perfect example: https://youtu.be/x5U_XD4kDJ4
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 03, 2015, 10:39:35 AM

Again, you're missing my point but it's become clear now that you're doing so intentionally so I'm gonna go ahead and hit the road.  I stayed away from here for a few months, now I remember why.

If he's missing it, then so am I.   I'm thinking it's not "everyone else"; over the past few months we've been having some deep insightful conversations - and no, we're not all drinking each other's bathwater; TL and I agree on almost nothing, and yet it's always civil and respectful - and having fun.  Seems like if we don't acknowledge your points adequately enough then you take your ball and go home.  Anyone who would lay claim to being "on the right side of history" less than a year after the Supreme Court case deciding the issue is pretty clearly not in this for the debate and the learning.  :) 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 05, 2015, 09:09:46 AM
One thing that needs to happen during these incidents, is that the media need to stop giving so much attention to the assailant. I'm not saying a complete blackout on their name or any details, but at least don't focus on that. Don't have the idiot's face all over your screen for hours on end. Don't spend hours on air digging into their past and speculating about their motives. Instead of using their name frequently, mostly refer to them with nondescript terms. To put it simply, don't give them so much attention.
If shooters aren't given such a reliable spotlight, you would probably see fewer incidents.

Unfortunately, with the American news media the way it is, there's very little chance of that happening.

I agree with this. And it's possible I just have my head in the sand, but I genuinely don't know his name. Or seen his picture. But I do know the name of Chris Mintz who was shot 7 times  (and survived) while rushing the shooter and helping get his attention off others. That is genuine progress.

Reminds me of this, which I love.
https://youtu.be/-LGHtc_D328

I've been thinking about how I'd react in this situation. If he really lined these people up, you'd have to assume that you're probably dead. Why not fight back? It's easy to say and probably much more difficult to actually do in a real situation like this, but I'd imagine most of these guys are not expecting people to fight back. 10 unarmed vs 1 armed guy would probably end with less casualties.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 05, 2015, 09:18:13 AM
One thing that needs to happen during these incidents, is that the media need to stop giving so much attention to the assailant. I'm not saying a complete blackout on their name or any details, but at least don't focus on that. Don't have the idiot's face all over your screen for hours on end. Don't spend hours on air digging into their past and speculating about their motives. Instead of using their name frequently, mostly refer to them with nondescript terms. To put it simply, don't give them so much attention.
If shooters aren't given such a reliable spotlight, you would probably see fewer incidents.

Unfortunately, with the American news media the way it is, there's very little chance of that happening.

I agree with this. And it's possible I just have my head in the sand, but I genuinely don't know his name. Or seen his picture. But I do know the name of Chris Mintz who was shot 7 times  (and survived) while rushing the shooter and helping get his attention off others. That is genuine progress.


There's also no reason why that vet shouldn't have been allowed to carry a firearm. I bet every family with a victim in that school wishes he had one when all of this went down.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 05, 2015, 09:28:38 AM
There's also no reason why that vet shouldn't have been allowed to carry a firearm. I bet every family with a victim in that school wishes he had one when all of this went down.

Agreed.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 05, 2015, 09:37:33 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on October 05, 2015, 09:55:23 AM
They might be mentally ill, but that doesn't mean they are without thought.  And it seems clear that if you decide you should have the power to kill other people en masse, you have a serious ego problem.  So attack the ego.  If they have a sexual harassment file, release it.  Find every person that knew them and have demeaning stories and give them air time.  Talk about how weak they were that they couldn't go fight somebody that couldn't fight back.

Leave their legacy in tatters as a warning sign to every nut job that thinks shooting people up will finally get them that high score in life.

Honestly that doesn't sound like a bad idea. The media won't stop covering these people, so why not just make them look terrible to deter others who might attempt these things?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 05, 2015, 10:13:34 AM

I would go further.  Anyone who has ever solved any kind of engineering or science problem will tell you that the key is to isolate the variables.   Light doesn't work, you check the bulb. That isn't it, you check the plug.  That isn't it, you check the fuse box.  That isn't it... and so on.  We KNOW that to the extent we are a gun culture, we have been since 1776, and if anything the gun control measures have increased over time.  We KNOW that if there is a rash of mass killings, they are a relatively recent occurrence.  So isolate the variables; what's different?  What is driving these predominantly young white males to want infamy in this fashion? 

You want to change laws to stop this, change these laws:  make it a crime to say the shooters name on television or in print.  Make it a crime to show the shooters face on television or in print.  Hold the parents fully and completely culpable for the acts of that person as if they pulled the trigger themselves, at least up to the age of 21.  I'm spit balling here, but the point is, like with any behavior modification, make the consequences worse for the desired action than if they remained inactive. 

In this case, the dude allegedly wrote a manifesto, and preserved the one life that was going to deliver that manifesto.  He had to have SOME understanding that he was going to be "vindicated" by doing so.  THAT'S what we have to stop.   (And by the way. while this might be considered a free speech issue, there is certainly a compelling state interest, and it is the least restrictive means for achieving that; we are not telling the press what stories to cover, we are not annihilating the Second Amendment, etc. etc.  They can cover every last detail of these events, just not the name.  We do this already with rape victims.).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 05, 2015, 11:12:51 AM


You want to change laws to stop this, change these laws:  make it a crime to say the shooters name on television or in print.  Make it a crime to show the shooters face on television or in print. 


I'm asking this because you know the law and how it works better than most on this board. Would that actually be possible without infringing on the freedom of the press?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 05, 2015, 11:43:52 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 05, 2015, 12:25:25 PM
Too soon is the perfect time to really start zeroing in on their flaws.  Not to blame the flaws, but to humiliate the image of these rampagers.  Not in the eyes of "normal people".  Normal people don't look at these idiots with any admiration.  But it was made clear this sack of crap looked up to prior rampagers.  Show them as hypocrites.  Make them "not one of us" in the future rampagers of America club.

I can totally understand now why bad peoples' corpses were hung in the village square for people to piss on and beat to hell.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: RuRoRul on October 05, 2015, 12:28:55 PM
Out of curiosity though - would everyone commenting on this thread be happy to not have any information about the shooter? Was he a student or employee of the school? Did he have a specific beef with someone? Was he an anti-religious psycho, a Christian nutjob, a Muslim extremist? Did he have a political agenda - could he even have been a pawn of the liberal elite perpetrating a "false flag" attack  ::)?

We wouldn't know, because the information wouldn't be released, the press wouldn't be allowed to report it, and on a discussion thread like this we wouldn't be able to talk about it.

I ask because I tend to agree that the reporting of these kinds of massacres does make it seem like a more attractive option (to people that are already seriously fucked up and looking for some way to lash out or go out with a bang). I think this case is one where the perpetrator explicitly said that the media attention of previous mass-shooters was one of his reasons for doing it. But then at the same time, the media are only reporting what we want to know. I went and looked at news stories to find out if there was information on who the shooter was, what their supposed reasons for doing it were, etc. and I imagine I'm not alone in that. If major news organisations didn't report it people would just go to whoever did, and if the government tried to stop anyone reporting it then there would just be (even more) screams of cover-up and conspiracy.

So I'm not really sure what the best approach is in terms of media attention - obviously trying not to glorify the shooter or give too much of a platform to their views is good, but when people say "don't report on it" I feel like what they really mean is "don't report it to the mass media following sheeple... but allow an informed, intelligent citzen like myself to get all the details".

Putting out all the negative information possible about the killer seems like an idea, to make it as unappealing as possible for people to want to be remembered that way... but then you have to remember that nothing makes a certain percentage of the population more likely to listen to / support you than the feeling that "the mainstream media" or "the man" is out to get you.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 05, 2015, 01:17:56 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 05, 2015, 03:47:58 PM


You want to change laws to stop this, change these laws:  make it a crime to say the shooters name on television or in print.  Make it a crime to show the shooters face on television or in print. 


I'm asking this because you know the law and how it works better than most on this board. Would that actually be possible without infringing on the freedom of the press?

It would infringe, but we allow that in a multitude of ways already.  We withhold the name and identifying details of victims of rape.  There just has to be a compelling state interest, and it has to be the least restrictive means to achieve that state interest.   Certainly this is far less egregious than wiping out a portion of the entire Second Amendment. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 05, 2015, 03:50:02 PM
Out of curiosity though - would everyone commenting on this thread be happy to not have any information about the shooter? Was he a student or employee of the school? Did he have a specific beef with someone? Was he an anti-religious psycho, a Christian nutjob, a Muslim extremist? Did he have a political agenda - could he even have been a pawn of the liberal elite perpetrating a "false flag" attack  ::)?

We wouldn't know, because the information wouldn't be released, the press wouldn't be allowed to report it, and on a discussion thread like this we wouldn't be able to talk about it.

I ask because I tend to agree that the reporting of these kinds of massacres does make it seem like a more attractive option (to people that are already seriously fucked up and looking for some way to lash out or go out with a bang). I think this case is one where the perpetrator explicitly said that the media attention of previous mass-shooters was one of his reasons for doing it. But then at the same time, the media are only reporting what we want to know. I went and looked at news stories to find out if there was information on who the shooter was, what their supposed reasons for doing it were, etc. and I imagine I'm not alone in that. If major news organisations didn't report it people would just go to whoever did, and if the government tried to stop anyone reporting it then there would just be (even more) screams of cover-up and conspiracy.

So I'm not really sure what the best approach is in terms of media attention - obviously trying not to glorify the shooter or give too much of a platform to their views is good, but when people say "don't report on it" I feel like what they really mean is "don't report it to the mass media following sheeple... but allow an informed, intelligent citzen like myself to get all the details".

Putting out all the negative information possible about the killer seems like an idea, to make it as unappealing as possible for people to want to be remembered that way... but then you have to remember that nothing makes a certain percentage of the population more likely to listen to / support you than the feeling that "the mainstream media" or "the man" is out to get you.

We can have the details - especially for forensic psychology purposes - without identifying THAT GUY and making him the face of disaffected youth.

Look, you guys are trying to find loopholes in this, and that is fair. That's what we do to "ideas"; attack them (NOT the messenger) to see which ones survive the scrutiny of analysis.  But let's not lose the big picture.  We're more than willing - it seems, anyway - to remove the 2nd Amendment right of the MILLIONS of legitimate and legal gun owners, on the "common sense", "consensus" chance that it MIGHT save one person from rampaging.   Not sure why it's all of a sudden not okay to limit ONE FACT from the reporting of the crime - the identifying name - in the same hopes. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 05, 2015, 04:23:41 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 05, 2015, 05:28:24 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 06, 2015, 05:54:39 AM
My feeling is blocking the name will just lead to conspiracy theories.  "They are hiding the fact that this is a false flag as a means to take away the 2nd amendment."  "They are hiding the fact that it was a Tea Party / BlackLivesMatter / Occupy / Palin supporter / Obama supporter."  So it is less about the worry of a constitutional crisis than adverse public reactions.  And if they start suppressing that information, some of the conspiracy theories might even be legitimate ... but who would know .... hence support for conspiracy theories ( a feedback loop ).

That was my first thought as well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 06, 2015, 06:48:11 AM
It seems to me that these cowards would get more fame and notoriety if they didn't kill themselves. CNN would broadcast every day of the trial and the story would last way longer. I wonder if fame and glory is really a motivation in these cases. It seems like these guys are suicidal and rather than just offing themselves they decide to to take others with them.

I also just read a story that this guy was posting online complaining about not having a girlfriend. This points the blame, in my eyes at least, to the entitled society we have created. Most parents nowadays raise their kids with the expectation that they deserve everything and don't have to work for it. If you don't have something it's because someone else is holding it or you back. You're perfect and can never do anything wrong.

Just curious as I haven't seen this option floated anywhere, but would people be interested a gun limit? I.e., you can only own one handgun per adult living at residence, one shotgun, one rifle, etc. I'm not sure how it would be enforced but I'm surprised no one has brought it up. Probably because one side of the argument only wants to get rid of all guns and refuse to listen to any other arguments.

Also, people hammering the NRA lobby crack me up. The lobby system runs this country more than the elected officials. If people want the government to start working for them again then a sweeping reform on the lobby system needs to occur.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 06, 2015, 06:58:38 AM
My feeling is blocking the name will just lead to conspiracy theories.  "They are hiding the fact that this is a false flag as a means to take away the 2nd amendment."  "They are hiding the fact that it was a Tea Party / BlackLivesMatter / Occupy / Palin supporter / Obama supporter."  So it is less about the worry of a constitutional crisis than adverse public reactions.  And if they start suppressing that information, some of the conspiracy theories might even be legitimate ... but who would know .... hence support for conspiracy theories ( a feedback loop ).

That was my first thought as well.

Why is this any different than the conspiracy theories that will arise with the banning of guns?  I've already heard that these mass killings are "inside jobs" perpetrated by the Left in order to disarm the people, drive the manufacturers out of business (thus requiring a bailout - and thus ownership - by the government), and remake the US into, essentially, a socialist dictatorship.

Look (and yes, this applies to the perpetrators too), whackos be whackos.  Someone looking for a conspiracy is going to find a conspiracy regardless of the fact pattern.  If that is all that is stopping us from acting, we're in big trouble.  Well, bigger trouble.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 06, 2015, 07:10:52 AM
Just curious as I haven't seen this option floated anywhere, but would people be interested a gun limit? I.e., you can only own one handgun per adult living at residence, one shotgun, one rifle, etc. I'm not sure how it would be enforced but I'm surprised no one has brought it up. Probably because one side of the argument only wants to get rid of all guns and refuse to listen to any other arguments.

That's a tough one because of collectors. While I think it would make sense, there's a fine line there. People will make the argument "you don't need all the guns, why have them?". I don't collect guns myself, but I do collect RC cars and trucks. I have about $2500 worth of RC inventory that has a collective run time of about an hour. I have two or three trucks I drive frequently, and others that I've never driven more than one or two times. I just like to have them. Some people like hanging art on the wall, I like displaying trucks. I can sympathize with the gun collectors on this one.

It's also hard because of where and how people may live. Where I grew up, gunshots could be heard every few minutes at certain times of the year. People hunted frequently and would most likely have a number a rifles based on what kind of game they were after. They are literally feeding their families. I don't think they should get rifle restrictions. Also, I'd probably trust their kids with a gun more than most adults I know who have them. A friend of mine is into competitive clay shooting and has a dozen or so shotguns. I don't feel like he should be limited. I remember Bill Maher saying once that he keeps multiple handguns around his house. I think he said two downstairs and one upstairs. I think that's fair. If my house is 1800 square feet and his is 4500, he won't have as quick access to a weapon if he needs one. I can get to any drawer in my house in under twenty seconds. If you live in a mansion, that's a different story. It would be in your best interest to maybe have several easy to get to handguns strategically hidden throughout your home.

I don't hate the idea of limiting magazine sizes. Many gun owners in CT hate it, but I have no problem with the 10 round limit for magazine capacity. It doesn't solve everything, but I think it's a good middle ground solution. The guys who like the range might get a little inconvenienced having to swap out mags more often, but at least they are still allowed to keep guns and ammo in their house.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boy, 11, accused of killing 8-year-old girl with shotgun
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/06/boy-11-charged-murder-girl-8/73433082/

Quote
An 11-year-old boy is charged with murder after he fatally shot his 8-year-old neighbor, police said, and neighbors say it was because the girl wouldn't let him see her dog.

Deputies were called to White Pine on Saturday night where they found MaKayla Dyer on the ground with a gunshot wound to the chest. She was taken to a hospital, where she later died.
Jefferson County Sheriff Bud McCoig said the boy, who has been charged as a juvenile, used his father's 12-gauge single-shot shotgun to shoot and kill the girl from inside his house.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 06, 2015, 07:43:54 AM
What the hell is wrong with people? What goes through this kids mind to say, "Fuck that little bitch, I want to pet that puppy. She's dead I'm going to grab my Pa's shotgun and blow her away". 11 is young, but not young enough to know the difference between right and wrong and life and death. Blows my mind. And I think he should be charged as an adult. You do an adult crime you pay the adult time. He's old enough to know better.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 06, 2015, 09:49:56 AM
I'm certain I'll take crap for saying this but it's my opinion so, I've been reading some of these things the Oregon shooter was whining about in these writings they've found and I'm sorry......the dude was just a whiny, baby....like 95% of the other shooters recently. Nothing they've released that he's wrote is anything that any of us here or in the world hasn't went through. He whined about not having a girlfriend, that he felt like an outsider.....blah blah blah. I mean, c'mon.

I know I'm not the only one who has struggled with depression. Pretty much from the time I was 18 to 24 or 25 I could have easily been clinically diagnosed with it. Hearing the stories on this forum and from friends I think it's something a large portion of people 'deal' with. and that's the thing, we've all 'dealt' with it and either have overcome it or are in the process. I'm sure the argument would then be "well that's why he was sick because he couldn't deal with it" but I think that's bunk. I think we (America) have created this false sense of entitlement that everyone 'deserves' the girlfriend or friends or love or whatever. You don't. It's not a promise or a right, those things are things you have to work for...they aren't given to you. I don't see how you can read what this guy wrote and think anything different other than he was just a punk who was whining about not having what other people had instead of doing something about it. He had a victim, pity party mentality and I'm sorry if it sounds harsh...but that type of attitude and mentality gets nowhere with me.

The only conclusion I see based on what evidence he's left behind as to why he decided to kill people and then himself is that these shootings have been so sensationalized by our media that in his own words, he saw an opportunity to briefly be known and remembered. IMO he was just another whiny brat who instead of applying himself and trying to improve his life, blamed everyone else for what he didn't have then 'took his ball and went home.'

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 06, 2015, 10:01:51 AM
I'm certain I'll take crap for saying this but it's my opinion so, I've been reading some of these things the Oregon shooter was whining about in these writings they've found and I'm sorry......the dude was just a whiny, baby....like 95% of the other shooters recently. Nothing they've released that he's wrote is anything that any of us here or in the world hasn't went through. He whined about not having a girlfriend, that he felt like an outsider.....blah blah blah. I mean, c'mon.

I know I'm not the only one who has struggled with depression. Pretty much from the time I was 18 to 24 or 25 I could have easily been clinically diagnosed with it. Hearing the stories on this forum and from friends I think it's something a large portion of people 'deal' with. and that's the thing, we've all 'dealt' with it and either have overcome it or are in the process. I'm sure the argument would then be "well that's why he was sick because he couldn't deal with it" but I think that's bunk. I think we (America) have created this false sense of entitlement that everyone 'deserves' the girlfriend or friends or love or whatever. You don't. It's not a promise or a right, those things are things you have to work for...they aren't given to you. I don't see how you can read what this guy wrote and think anything different other than he was just a punk who was whining about not having what other people had instead of doing something about it. He had a victim, pity party mentality and I'm sorry if it sounds harsh...but that type of attitude and mentality gets nowhere with me.

The only conclusion I see based on what evidence he's left behind as to why he decided to kill people and then himself is that these shootings have been so sensationalized by our media that in his own words, he saw an opportunity to briefly be known and remembered. IMO he was just another whiny brat who instead of applying himself and trying to improve his life, blamed everyone else for what he didn't have then 'took his ball and went home.'

I 100% agree. He is the creation of the entitled society we have today. I worked my ass off for 6 years at my current job to get a nice promotion. Most of my colleagues referred to me as the golden child or a kiss ass. The reality was and is that they were just not motivated to work as hard or just plain lazy. Either way, these are adults with kids. If they act that way how do you think their kids act? This one lady I worked with would call the school almost everyday to question why her son had the grade he did or to make sure he turned in his homework. Pathetic. And the sad thing this is how the majority seems to act now.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 06, 2015, 10:14:46 AM
My feeling is blocking the name will just lead to conspiracy theories.  "They are hiding the fact that this is a false flag as a means to take away the 2nd amendment."  "They are hiding the fact that it was a Tea Party / BlackLivesMatter / Occupy / Palin supporter / Obama supporter." 
Or a Jade Helm operative.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 06, 2015, 10:18:03 AM


Boy, 11, accused of killing 8-year-old girl with shotgun
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/06/boy-11-charged-murder-girl-8/73433082/


That father should be in jail for first degree murder as if he willingly pulled the trigger himself.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 06, 2015, 10:42:03 AM


Boy, 11, accused of killing 8-year-old girl with shotgun
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/10/06/boy-11-charged-murder-girl-8/73433082/


That father should be in jail for first degree murder as if he willingly pulled the trigger himself.

Completely agree. I'm all for a zero tolerance policy. If he were to make it out of jail, he should, by law, not be allowed to possess a firearm again.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on October 06, 2015, 10:42:23 AM
I'm certain I'll take crap for saying this but it's my opinion so, I've been reading some of these things the Oregon shooter was whining about in these writings they've found and I'm sorry......the dude was just a whiny, baby....like 95% of the other shooters recently. Nothing they've released that he's wrote is anything that any of us here or in the world hasn't went through. He whined about not having a girlfriend, that he felt like an outsider.....blah blah blah. I mean, c'mon.

IMO he was just another whiny brat who instead of applying himself and trying to improve his life, blamed everyone else for what he didn't have then 'took his ball and went home.'

I 100% agree. He is the creation of the entitled society we have today. And the sad thing this is how the majority seems to act now.

I disagree. This guy was a whiny crybaby that wanted a girlfriend and complained even though he was most likely a complete douchebag to women (look up 'friendzone'). He's not the 'creation of the entitled society'; people don't feel entitled to having a girlfriend (except people like him [few] who think women are objects and that he deserves one). That's just dumb. And he was just dumb. And the majority of people certainly don't act like this  :lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 06, 2015, 12:09:00 PM
I'm certain I'll take crap for saying this but it's my opinion so, I've been reading some of these things the Oregon shooter was whining about in these writings they've found and I'm sorry......the dude was just a whiny, baby....like 95% of the other shooters recently. Nothing they've released that he's wrote is anything that any of us here or in the world hasn't went through. He whined about not having a girlfriend, that he felt like an outsider.....blah blah blah. I mean, c'mon.

IMO he was just another whiny brat who instead of applying himself and trying to improve his life, blamed everyone else for what he didn't have then 'took his ball and went home.'

I 100% agree. He is the creation of the entitled society we have today. And the sad thing this is how the majority seems to act now.

I disagree. This guy was a whiny crybaby that wanted a girlfriend and complained even though he was most likely a complete douchebag to women (look up 'friendzone'). He's not the 'creation of the entitled society'; people don't feel entitled to having a girlfriend (except people like him [few] who think women are objects and that he deserves one). That's just dumb. And he was just dumb. And the majority of people certainly don't act like this  :lol

Of course he is.  It doesn't have to be money; anytime you act out disproportionately because you don't get what you feel you "deserve", it's entitlement.   Girls, wages... I don't think it matters.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 06, 2015, 12:16:03 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 06, 2015, 12:24:11 PM
I'm more nurture vs. nature when it comes to how people turn out. I admit that nature/genetics has a role but I strongly feel that the environment you are raised in has much more of an impact than just being born crazy.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 06, 2015, 12:25:29 PM
I think this has to do more with the complete inability to cope with depression rather than being upset that he didn't just get something (a girl) handed to him. We're assuming he felt entitled to a girlfriend. It was probably more a long the lines of non-stop self-loathing and not feeling like he was capable of ever getting one. The stuff I've read about him, in my opinion, comes off as him feeling like a constant failure and unable to succeed. While I agree with what Gary said in regards to many things, I'm not sure it applicable here. You can get addicted to negativity just as easily as you can alcohol, world of war craft, or texting.

Yes, there is definitely a degree of responsibility in not letting your life become that, but the brain is a crazy place. I'm not defending this guy, but our media, even the shows for the young kids, reinforce from an early age the idea of a relationship. I can totally see how someone at a young age can feel as though there is something wrong with them for not having one. I'm thankful for dating apps every day because it allowed me to meet who I consider to be the greatest girl in the world. Before that, I couldn't even talk to a girl let alone have a relationship with one. I hated myself until I was about 21 or so because no matter how hard I tried, girls just didn't come easy to me. If you rummaged through my Myspace account, you find plenty of red flags from those days. You'd find stuff far more concerning than what this guy talked about.

This case seems to reflect this guy's inability to properly convey emotions. Some people can handle them. This guy couldn't. I guess you can make the argument that people have been able to cope with emotions for thousands of years and we've become pussified, but I'll make the argument that there are more social variables than ever before. Our ability to communicate and relate to one another has changed way faster than our brains have been able to evolve. We are throwing stuff at our brains that they were never designed to handle. It's not surprising that some of them go haywire.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 06, 2015, 04:56:39 PM
Basically, the guy was an asshole. While I certainly support somebody wanting to understand what was in this guy's head, it's important to keep in mind that the world is full of assholes of every different flavor. I gather this guy hated himself because he couldn't get laid. Dude in so-Cal hated women for the same reason. Dickhead in that church a few months ago hated black folk. Huberty was pissed at the government. Hassan was pissed at the army. A guy who shot up a club down here 35 years ago went off because a woman in declining his dance offer called him a monkey. People running amok because their job sucks is actually pretty common. The unifying thread here is that they all fit into the broader category of "wow, what an asshole!" and sometimes assholes will act out. Sorry to say there's just not much you're going to do to negate that fact.

There are plenty of times where understanding what makes some guy tick is helpful in preventing further mayhem. I can't help but think that sometimes it really is just this simple, though.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 07, 2015, 06:00:45 AM
But there's something different than the generic asshole here. An asshole steals your parking space at the last second with no blinker, lets his dog shit on your front lawn without picking it up, or posts his ex's nudes online. There is something seriously wrong when someone lacks the ability to contain a rage which results in the intentional death of multiple people. That's something beyond asshole. We used to just say people were simply possessed before we understood schizophrenia. I can't help but think that there is an underlying, not yet understood problem in the brain that results in this type of behavior.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 07, 2015, 06:10:40 AM
"I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. "I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all." - Ben Carson


mmmkay
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on October 07, 2015, 06:40:35 AM
"I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. "I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all." - Ben Carson


mmmkay

This is actually along the lines of something I posted the other day. I think it's easier said than done, but you'd have to think that trying to stop the guy and possibly dying is better than just standing there waiting to get shot. Maybe someone should create a shooter system where they hit a button and all the lights go out, the fire alarm goes off, the sprinklers go off, etc. to create confusion and give people a chance to stop the guy. Or just give people cans of bear mace.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 07, 2015, 07:22:59 AM
I really hope some nutjob doesn't take Carson up on his claim.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 07, 2015, 07:42:34 AM
"I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. "I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all." - Ben Carson


mmmkay

This is actually along the lines of something I posted the other day. I think it's easier said than done, but you'd have to think that trying to stop the guy and possibly dying is better than just standing there waiting to get shot. Maybe someone should create a shooter system where they hit a button and all the lights go out, the fire alarm goes off, the sprinklers go off, etc. to create confusion and give people a chance to stop the guy. Or just give people cans of bear mace.

There was a lot of discussion on talk radio about 'why' people would still answer they were Christian after seeing this cry baby was killing those who said they were. I had a few people I know ask me what I would have said and I flat out said first off......I'd have had my gun on me so I would have been returning fire......but in the hypothetical situation of me not being armed and him sticking to the procedure he used to execute those people.....he'd have never gotten to me because I'd have rushed him. I might have gotten shot and killed in the process but (I'd like to believe) I wouldn't have sat there and waited my turn to get shot. You never know how you'll react in a situation like that....maybe I'd have froze solid? Who knows? I doubt I'd do that but until your in the situation I guess it's really unknown. But, he'd not gotten my answer as to if I was a Christian or not because in either situation, me having my gun on me (which I near always do) or me deciding not to sit and wait...I'd have engaged the guy and 'taken the fight' to him rather than he being the one who set the rules.

I completely agree with Carson. gimme' two or three other people to throw a variable at that cry baby he wasn't expecting (getting rushed) and I think the entire ordeal ends up different. And/or.....allow law abiding citizens to carry their weapons and not be sitting ducks and he may thing twice about doing it. And/or.....allow teachers to arm themselves. And/or.....allow 4 or 5 Vets to patrol college campuses everywhere armed to the 't' and see if this crap stops.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 07, 2015, 09:22:54 AM
I kind of agree with Lucien.  The entitlement culture may be reinforcing some things, but I'm pretty sure that these types of people aren't just *normal* people pushed too far and then snap one day.  I think they are born a ticking time bomb and unless you literally tip toe around them to make sure they never face adversity in life, it is just a matter of when.

Hopefully they can determine (if they haven't to some degree already) what different chemical/biological make up creates these conditions.  Whiny Anakin Skywalker was going to become Vader no matter what forks in the road he took.  It was his destiny.

I never said they were normal.   Most people - even in an entitlement environment - find ways of releasing the pressure.  But the "line" at which that pressure release starts to hurt others changes, and the methodology of release changes.  I have a friend who lives in Russia - not by any measure an entitlement society - and the outcome is very different.   They have more guns than us, and more homicides, but they don't have the "message killings" (what I'm starting to use to refer to these mass killings).  They basically drink themselves to death or something similar.  It's not about "striking back" and "shocking the world" or being on the "biggest stages" or whatever the fancy colloquialism is today. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 07, 2015, 09:31:20 AM
But there's something different than the generic asshole here. An asshole steals your parking space at the last second with no blinker, lets his dog shit on your front lawn without picking it up, or posts his ex's nudes online. There is something seriously wrong when someone lacks the ability to contain a rage which results in the intentional death of multiple people. That's something beyond asshole. We used to just say people were simply possessed before we understood schizophrenia. I can't help but think that there is an underlying, not yet understood problem in the brain that results in this type of behavior.

Well, I think you're both right, but the difference is, in el Barto's scenario, all those assholes are mad at SOMEONE ELSE.  It's not self-loathing that gets you out to kill 20 people.  There are centuries worth of stories about people who loath themselves (we listen to a LOT of music and watch a LOT of movies by people who loath themselves), but it is a relatively new phenomenon that this has translated into an acting out, a blaming of others. 

I think it is very complicated, and I think media plays a massive role in this; watch any reality TV show these days and it is as predictable as the sun.   Obligatory guy with sleeve and gauges.  Obligatory flaming homosexual.  Obligatory butch lesbian.   Obligatory dickhead jock.  All vying to see who can be the most outrageous, putting the most inane things on television for all to see as if they are really important...  but at the same time validating things that ten or twenty years ago would have gotten your ass beat in high school.   

It's a conflict of interest and a conflict of message.   Sorry, but not EVERYTHING is of world importance.  Not EVERY thought you have is valid, justifiable and defensible.  Not EVERYTHING has to be played out on a 55" HD television.  I'm not in his head, but I can imagine him taking a "why not me?" position, and having no one or nothing to turn to to understand why, and opting for all he knows:  the couple of douchebags online that aren't interested in him as a person at all, just acting tough and using cool slang, and being like that jackass on television. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 07, 2015, 09:38:38 AM
"I would not just stand there and let him shoot me. "I would say, 'Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all." - Ben Carson


mmmkay

This is actually along the lines of something I posted the other day. I think it's easier said than done, but you'd have to think that trying to stop the guy and possibly dying is better than just standing there waiting to get shot. Maybe someone should create a shooter system where they hit a button and all the lights go out, the fire alarm goes off, the sprinklers go off, etc. to create confusion and give people a chance to stop the guy. Or just give people cans of bear mace.

There was a lot of discussion on talk radio about 'why' people would still answer they were Christian after seeing this cry baby was killing those who said they were. I had a few people I know ask me what I would have said and I flat out said first off......I'd have had my gun on me so I would have been returning fire......but in the hypothetical situation of me not being armed and him sticking to the procedure he used to execute those people.....he'd have never gotten to me because I'd have rushed him. I might have gotten shot and killed in the process but (I'd like to believe) I wouldn't have sat there and waited my turn to get shot. You never know how you'll react in a situation like that....maybe I'd have froze solid? Who knows? I doubt I'd do that but until your in the situation I guess it's really unknown. But, he'd not gotten my answer as to if I was a Christian or not because in either situation, me having my gun on me (which I near always do) or me deciding not to sit and wait...I'd have engaged the guy and 'taken the fight' to him rather than he being the one who set the rules.

I completely agree with Carson. gimme' two or three other people to throw a variable at that cry baby he wasn't expecting (getting rushed) and I think the entire ordeal ends up different. And/or.....allow law abiding citizens to carry their weapons and not be sitting ducks and he may thing twice about doing it. And/or.....allow teachers to arm themselves. And/or.....allow 4 or 5 Vets to patrol college campuses everywhere armed to the 't' and see if this crap stops.

I don't know you from a row of assholes, so I don't know whether to call "Right on!" or "Bullshit!", but I will say this:  as we experience more of these, the response will change.  I think you will see more of this kind of response, and as with anything (remember Flight 93?) it promotes momentum in that direction.   In other words, I don't know if I would have charged or not.   I really don't, but to be dead honest with you, I don't think I would.  I have four kids and being in the current state (alive) would have held some allure for me.  BUT: I see you with a weapon pulled, and making an offensive move, and I'm with you 1000%.   This may make me sound like a pussy, but I prefer to think having at least two people of like mind takes us from "sacrificial lamb" territory to "concerted tactical response" territory.   Just to take the shooter off his plan, off his game is probably enough to save some lives, even if those aren't ours.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 07, 2015, 09:47:00 AM
Unless I had a weapon on me, I wouldn't have moved. No way. Especially if I was toward the back of the classroom. I'm assuming if that guy's finger is on the trigger, he's firing at anything that so much as hints as moving in his general direction. I'd rather see 5 people in that classroom with guns over 25 people willing to bum rush the shooter.

Based on Ben Carson's stage presence and his demeanor when answering questions, I'd be willing to bet that he would have actually cowered in fear with his hands folded.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 07, 2015, 09:56:18 AM
Whether or not to go on the offensive is a very simple logical decision. Once you reach the point where you have nothing to lose then you obviously rush him. The problem is that under that scenario logical reasoning skills are the very first thing to go. I agree with GMD in that I've always thought (long before that flight 93 thing) that you rush the guy. At the same time none of us know how we'd react and it's just as conceivable that everybody in that classroom felt exactly the same as we did but didn't act that way when the time came.

Stadler is also right. We're seeing increasing instances of people fighting back, and as we see more instances it will slowly become the instinctive behavior.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 07, 2015, 09:59:55 AM
As for the assholes comment, setting aside the notion that there are varying degrees of assholery, Chino is certainly correct that some people will contain their behavior better than others. However I didn't get that's what he was dissecting in the post I was referring to. His mindset was that he was an asshole. The fact that he was unable or unwilling to not slaughter a bunch of people because of it is a separate issue, and certainly one that I have no problem trying to better understand (although it's possible that it's as simple as "he was an extraordinary asshole").
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 07, 2015, 12:07:31 PM
I don't know you from a row of assholes, so I don't know whether to call "Right on!" or "Bullshit!"

Well like I said....I'd like to "believe" that's how I'd respond. I've taken a dozen or so pistol defense classes and as sad as it sounds I 'visualize' instances like this (not dream about or hope someday it'll happen) but I think through 'how' I'd respond whether it be at the mall, restaurant or now that I'm back in school...there. Like I said, EB pointed it out also....no one really knows how they'd actually respond. I don't think I'd freeze but heck....who knows.

I've had one instance in the (7) years I've had my CCW where I really thought something was about to happen and I was going to have to pull my weapon....it was a VERY angry customer in an AT&T store that did everything but assault employees. He was so over the top and ticked....it was scary and as he was going on and throwing things and threatening I positioned myself to where 'if' he pulled a weapon (because literally I think everyone in the store thought it was coming due to the threats he was making)...but I positioned myself to where I was within a range that I knew I could deliver a couple rounds that would have disabled him without putting others in harms way. I say that to back up my notion of that I 'believe' I'd respond in the ways I described because I 'kind of' have already.

I have four kids and being in the current state (alive) would have held some allure for me.   

I have three and I think this is the largest variable that would affect any type of action. I'd much rather live out my days as their Dad rather than being a memory of their Dad. It's such a tough thing to state for certain what you would or wouldn't do.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: RuRoRul on October 07, 2015, 12:45:20 PM
I think a lot of people think that since just rushing the attacker makes sense they would do it... however the simple fact that it doesn't seem like many people do that (despite it not taking a genius to think of it) makes me think that a lot of us probably wouldn't when actually in the situation.

And that kind of makes sense. Even if you weren't just completely shocked into inaction, the thought process is something like "There are 20 of us in this room - even if he is heavily armed and we have nothing, if we all rush him at once then he might get two or three of us, but..." However that only works if all of you (or at least a significant number) try to do something. But if you're in a room full of 20 people you don't know very well, it's not going to be easy to quickly coordinate any sort of group effort, and unless you somehow trust that most of the people in the room think the same way you do and are going to rush at the attacker, then you will know that there's a very good chance you'll just end up being the only one charging towards the shooter - so not only will you probably be dead, but you won't have done any good either.

It's basically similar to the classical "tragedy of the commons" problem - if everyone trusted that everyone else would do what's best for the common good, they would do one thing, but if you don't trust everyone else to do that then it's better to do the opposite.

But as people were saying, with more and more of these attacks in recent history, people might be more likely to react quicker and, perhaps more importantly, to believe that other people probably think the same thing as them and will be willing to try to fight back against the attacker.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 07, 2015, 12:47:10 PM
She's lucky she didn't kill someone. This woman should be arrested for public endangerment. There is a time and a place to be a hero. This was not the time.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bystander-shoots-home-depot-shoplifter-detroit_56154391e4b021e856d3128e

Quote
A bystander outside a Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan, opened fire on a man suspected of shoplifting from the store on Tuesday as he attempted to flee the scene in an SUV driven by another man.

Police told The Detroit News that the bystander, a woman with a license to carry a concealed pistol, shot at the getaway car's tires after witnessing a loss prevention officer attempt to stop the suspect and fail.

It's unclear how many shots the woman, who is in her 40s, fired from her 9 mm handgun,

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 07, 2015, 12:55:24 PM
She's lucky she didn't kill someone. This woman should be arrested for public endangerment. There is a time and a place to be a hero. This was not the time.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bystander-shoots-home-depot-shoplifter-detroit_56154391e4b021e856d3128e

Quote
A bystander outside a Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan, opened fire on a man suspected of shoplifting from the store on Tuesday as he attempted to flee the scene in an SUV driven by another man.

Police told The Detroit News that the bystander, a woman with a license to carry a concealed pistol, shot at the getaway car's tires after witnessing a loss prevention officer attempt to stop the suspect and fail.

It's unclear how many shots the woman, who is in her 40s, fired from her 9 mm handgun,

That's just retarded and i think at the minimum she should have her CCW revoked for a long period of time. In the class I took the instructor was very clear on several things. one was, the instance you draw your weapon plan on spending $15k because that's how much a decent lawyer is going to run you right off the bat to defend the inevitable law suite. Two, you have to think and determine 'why' your intervening. should you draw your weapon on a guy beating the crap out of his girlfriend/wife in public? Oh and....when  you draw your weapon who's to say 10 seconds later someone doesn't come on the scene who is carrying a weapon and sees you holding a weapon pointed at someone....they have no idea what's going on....and so on.

For as 'pro' gun as I am, this type of story boils my blood because there was no call for this at all. Whomever taught that lady completely failed her because that should have never even been an option in her mind to draw her weapon over a freakin' shoplifting incident. Do YOU FEEL YOUR (YOUR LIFE) LIFE IS IMMINENTLY THREATENED? PERIOD!!
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 07, 2015, 02:13:40 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 07, 2015, 02:28:13 PM
Also, I'm not getting the Carson hate on this

I understand why Carson's getting it in the media. Because he's made himself a target and every little thing he says is going to be attacked. Imagine if he admits he prefers A1 Steak Sauce over Heinze 57? Point being.....since he is more intelligent than 98% of the people interviewing him they are going to try and rail him for everything he says.

His 'muslim can't be Presidents' statement....completely blown out of context. Read the full interview. He's going to keep getting hammered no matter what on anything he says as he states his opinion. What's great about it is that he is so smart that he already knows what's going to happen....he knows the game so I don't think he's saying anything he's not ready to defend.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 07, 2015, 03:07:08 PM
She's lucky she didn't kill someone. This woman should be arrested for public endangerment. There is a time and a place to be a hero. This was not the time.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bystander-shoots-home-depot-shoplifter-detroit_56154391e4b021e856d3128e (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bystander-shoots-home-depot-shoplifter-detroit_56154391e4b021e856d3128e)

Quote
A bystander outside a Home Depot in Auburn Hills, Michigan, opened fire on a man suspected of shoplifting from the store on Tuesday as he attempted to flee the scene in an SUV driven by another man.

Police told The Detroit News that the bystander, a woman with a license to carry a concealed pistol, shot at the getaway car's tires after witnessing a loss prevention officer attempt to stop the suspect and fail.

It's unclear how many shots the woman, who is in her 40s, fired from her 9 mm handgun,

That's just retarded and i think at the minimum she should have her CCW revoked for a long period of time. In the class I took the instructor was very clear on several things. one was, the instance you draw your weapon plan on spending $15k because that's how much a decent lawyer is going to run you right off the bat to defend the inevitable law suite. Two, you have to think and determine 'why' your intervening. should you draw your weapon on a guy beating the crap out of his girlfriend/wife in public? Oh and....when  you draw your weapon who's to say 10 seconds later someone doesn't come on the scene who is carrying a weapon and sees you holding a weapon pointed at someone....they have no idea what's going on....and so on.

For as 'pro' gun as I am, this type of story boils my blood because there was no call for this at all. Whomever taught that lady completely failed her because that should have never even been an option in her mind to draw her weapon over a freakin' shoplifting incident. Do YOU FEEL YOUR (YOUR LIFE) LIFE IS IMMINENTLY THREATENED? PERIOD!!
Yeah, I'm amazed they're even having to decide whether or not charges should be filed. She's looking at several no-brainers, and the only decision they should be trying to make is whether or not attempted murder factors into it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 07, 2015, 03:12:54 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 11, 2015, 09:46:39 PM
Also, I'm not getting the Carson hate on this

I understand why Carson's getting it in the media. Because he's made himself a target and every little thing he says is going to be attacked. Imagine if he admits he prefers A1 Steak Sauce over Heinze 57? Point being.....since he is more intelligent than 98% of the people interviewing him they are going to try and rail him for everything he says.

His 'muslim can't be Presidents' statement....completely blown out of context. Read the full interview. He's going to keep getting hammered no matter what on anything he says as he states his opinion. What's great about it is that he is so smart that he already knows what's going to happen....he knows the game so I don't think he's saying anything he's not ready to defend.


I never understand how when a politician makes a stupid comment, it's the media's fault. Here's why Ben Carson's comments on the Oregon shooting were stupid:

1. He was calling people who were just murdered cowards.
2. He's a hypocrite. https://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/09/politics/ben-carson-popeyes-gunman/

Here's why his Muslim comments were stupid:
1. He's a hypocrite. He's selling stickers that just say "I AM A CHRISTIAN." While running for POTUS. https://twitter.com/RealBenCarson/status/650044758975479808/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
I'd think the POTUS should be trying to be as inclusive as possible. Other Christians, like jammindude, can tell you why trumpeting up ones faith while running for such a high office is a terrible idea.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 11, 2015, 10:44:51 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on October 12, 2015, 08:31:27 AM
when a politician makes a stupid comment

I personally don't think either of those comments Carson made were stupid.

I'd think the POTUS should be trying to be as inclusive as possible. Other Christians, like jammindude, can tell you why trumpeting up ones faith while running for such a high office is a terrible idea.

I think at this point in time in American history I'd trumpet my Faith as loud as I could no matter what I was running for. The country needs a man of 'true' faith and not a faith that is manufactured just to look good or check mark a box to mark it off a list of "should have's".

 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 12, 2015, 08:36:26 AM
I think at this point in time in American history I'd trumpet my Faith as loud as I could no matter what I was running for. The country needs a man of 'true' faith and not a faith that is manufactured just to look good or check mark a box to mark it off a list of "should have's".
I'd be alright with that, but at this point how would anybody know? Moreover, a person who said "God? I wised up on that when I was 12" should be just as acceptable. To me it's not the particular belief (although I obviously would prefer the latter) but my dislike for people who bullshit their way through one to get votes.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 12, 2015, 09:29:44 AM

I think at this point in time in American history I'd trumpet my Faith as loud as I could no matter what I was running for. The country needs a man of 'true' faith and not a faith that is manufactured just to look good or check mark a box to mark it off a list of "should have's".

I have a problem with that.  Men of true faith need not trumpet to anyone.  They have one person, and one person only, to answer to.  The Almighty Father.  To me, the more people "talk" about their faith, the less I believe they are of faith.

I've long taught my daughter:  "If someone has to tell you they are [insert characteristic], they probably aren't."

I don't need someone in office that goes to church more than I do.  I need someone in office that knows more about national and global economics than I do.   PERIOD. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 12, 2015, 09:34:42 AM
Here's a story I'm sure you all heard on your news feeds this morning (NOT).  it was in the "Connecticut" section of the Hartford Courtant yesterday:

Guy stops over at his father's house about three times  a week to check on the place.  Comes over and finds the door open; he draws his (legally owned, legally carried) pistol and walks in, to find some scum bag filling a plastic bag with his dad's belongings.  He tells him to freeze; the guy does.  Thinking the situation is under control, and not wanting any accidents, he holsters his weapon and calls the police.  As the call ends, the criminal gets bold and rushes the guy.  They fight, and the guy is lucky enough to hit the criminal in the head, stunning him.  He then uses his belt to tie the criminal's hands behind his back, and - gun again drawn - escorts the guy to the front driveway, where he holds him at gunpoint against the car until police arrive. 

Gun present, carefully used by a conscientious owner, and crime averted with no deaths or lasting injuries.  Go figure.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 12, 2015, 09:36:19 AM
I need someone in office that knows more about national and global economics than I do.   PERIOD.

It's a shame that the rest of the country doesn't share that mindset. Sadly, we live in a country where a good amount of people believe that the faith of the president directly effects how much mercy god shows this country. Why did South Carolina flood? Because Obama supports gay marriage. Duh.

Every time I see this bumper sticker (They seem to be common in CT), I cringe. I'm not saying don't practice faith, but please don't think that having god on your side is the number one priority in this country and the only way to save it. You can pray all you want, but if you elect people that can't understand a balance sheet, you're just wasting your breath.
(https://api.ning.com/files/yC7AOXGJlPV5cCar2DS1igIsD-e5lug96LvJsbtMhvicQiBtoHWgQioS*76UHhZrl6Whtv3BQGm0kBWy-I-2JYocfMoZEvwQ/HelpAmericaPraytheRosary.PNG?width=737&height=232)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 10:54:19 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 12, 2015, 11:15:21 AM
I've only met one person that talks this way (not about Obama, as the year was 2006).  One. 
Come down here to my neck of the woods, I'll show you around.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 11:21:16 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 12, 2015, 11:28:27 AM
Meet Pastor James Manning. This guy has an entire church of people who think as he does.

(https://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1703030!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_635/demon27u-2-web.jpg)

It's a shame that the rest of the country doesn't share that mindset. Sadly, we live in a country where a good amount of people believe that the faith of the president directly effects how much mercy god shows this country. Why did South Carolina flood? Because Obama supports gay marriage. Duh.
What's a *good amount*?  I've only met one person that talks this way (not about Obama, as the year was 2006).  One.  Every other time I've only heard it from some religious leader that makes their living by saying outrageous things.

I ask you this... Why are they able to make their living at it?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 11:46:53 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 12, 2015, 01:03:50 PM
Am I the only one that actually finds that sign SO ridiculously over the top that it is funny?   "A white homo is going to steal your man"?  As if the black man has nothing to say about it?   I'd be more offended if I was a straight black man, with the implication that I don't have a will of my own, but am beholden to my wife or whatever swingin' white dick that comes along!
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 01:12:20 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 12, 2015, 01:13:47 PM
I've only met one person that talks this way (not about Obama, as the year was 2006).  One. 
Come down here to my neck of the woods, I'll show you around.
I have relatives (a few generations removed) from that neck of the woods.  They don't talk that way at all. 
Well, that obviously means that no people from here are really like that.  I guess the direct experience I have from living here all my life is imaginary.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 02:37:53 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 12, 2015, 03:21:21 PM

I think at this point in time in American history I'd trumpet my Faith as loud as I could no matter what I was running for. The country needs a man of 'true' faith and not a faith that is manufactured just to look good or check mark a box to mark it off a list of "should have's".

I have a problem with that.  Men of true faith need not trumpet to anyone.  They have one person, and one person only, to answer to.  The Almighty Father.  To me, the more people "talk" about their faith, the less I believe they are of faith.

I've long taught my daughter:  "If someone has to tell you they are [insert characteristic], they probably aren't."

I don't need someone in office that goes to church more than I do.  I need someone in office that knows more about national and global economics than I do.   PERIOD.

This is what I'm getting at. The idea that a Muslim shouldn't be elected, but someone of "true faith" is to me completely missing the point (not to mention hypocritical.) POTUS isn't a religious office. A person's faith (or lack of) shouldn't matter one bit. But we have a major candidate "trumpeting his faith as loudly as possible," and that's not only accepted, it's seen as a positive! We have a large voting bloc that will only vote for someone whose faith they trust. That's absurd. Vote for the guy who will do the best job on the economy, social issues, and foreign policy. Religion has nothing to do with any of that.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 12, 2015, 09:00:01 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on October 12, 2015, 09:45:00 PM


This is what I'm getting at. The idea that a Muslim shouldn't be elected, but someone of "true faith" is to me completely missing the point (not to mention hypocritical.) POTUS isn't a religious office. A person's faith (or lack of) shouldn't matter one bit. But we have a major candidate "trumpeting his faith as loudly as possible," and that's not only accepted, it's seen as a positive! We have a large voting bloc that will only vote for someone whose faith they trust. That's absurd. Vote for the guy who will do the best job on the economy, social issues, and foreign policy. Religion has nothing to do with any of that.

We also had many people vote for a candidate in 2008 just because he was black.  Is that any more absurd?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 12, 2015, 11:53:38 PM
Vote for the guy who will do the best job on the economy, social issues, and foreign policy. Religion has nothing to do with any of that.
But that wasn't really the qualification Carson was putting on it.  It didn't have to do with the religious side of Islam, but the political side.  Not all religions are equal.  Islam's founder was just as much about political inter weavings and military conquest.  Hearing Carson talk about it in context and not a "heavily edited" video made that clear to anybody watching.  I saw his comment live (as in when it was first airing) and I took it that way an immediately knew it would become politicized.

That doesn't address the point I made. He has quite literally made his Christianity a center point of his campaign, where it has no business being.

Kev, yes of course.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 13, 2015, 08:25:31 AM
Once again.  A "great amount" was thrown out there without qualification.  I'm looking for a number and corresponding data, not personal stories.  If personal stories and rare walking jokes are going to be offered as proof, then I'm going to come back with "personal experience" data.
Well, I'm not sure where to get a number and corresponding data.

What I can tell you is what I hear in discussions and conversations with people, and what I see on church signs, tee-shirts, and bumper stickers, and what I see on facebook, and what I read in the newspaper, both in stories and in letters to the editor.  Around here, a lot of people vote according to their faith.  A lot of people will vote for candidates that they perceive are the same faith as they are.  A lot of people become almost single-cause or double-cause voters, and vote Republican solely for the reason that Republicans tend to be anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion.  That's the way it is around here, especially in the rural areas - it is less so in metropolitan areas.

I doubt sincerely that North Carolina is any different in this regard than any of the other southern states.  They don't call it "the Bible Belt" for no reason.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 13, 2015, 08:25:59 AM
I am not defending voting for a person because he's black. Let's get that right out of the way.

There is a difference between the two, though. Voting for a black candidate is voting for something very new and very different. I don't think anybody would expect a black president to behave the same as a white one, for better or for worse, and there is some appeal to that. Voting for a Christian president is insuring that, at least in that regard, you're getting ostensibly the same for the last 100 years. To that end, if one of these losers came out and identified himself as a any non-Christian person I'd give him much greater consideration to that end, simply because presents an opportunity for him to be different than the shitbags we've grown accustomed to in the white house.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 13, 2015, 08:45:11 AM
Once again.  A "great amount" was thrown out there without qualification.  I'm looking for a number and corresponding data, not personal stories.  If personal stories and rare walking jokes are going to be offered as proof, then I'm going to come back with "personal experience" data.
Well, I'm not sure where to get a number and corresponding data.

What I can tell you is what I hear in discussions and conversations with people, and what I see on church signs, tee-shirts, and bumper stickers, and what I see on facebook, and what I read in the newspaper, both in stories and in letters to the editor.  Around here, a lot of people vote according to their faith.  A lot of people will vote for candidates that they perceive are the same faith as they are.  A lot of people become almost single-cause or double-cause voters, and vote Republican solely for the reason that Republicans tend to be anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion.  That's the way it is around here, especially in the rural areas - it is less so in metropolitan areas.

I doubt sincerely that North Carolina is any different in this regard than any of the other southern states.  They don't call it "the Bible Belt" for no reason.

I can't find much outside of 2000 and 2008 figures (showed people of religion preferred Bush and Romney by a landslide), but the fact that 0 out of the 535 members of congress identify as atheists is a pretty good indicator.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 13, 2015, 11:51:27 AM
I am not defending voting for a person because he's black. Let's get that right out of the way.

There is a difference between the two, though. Voting for a black candidate is voting for something very new and very different. I don't think anybody would expect a black president to behave the same as a white one, for better or for worse, and there is some appeal to that. Voting for a Christian president is insuring that, at least in that regard, you're getting ostensibly the same for the last 100 years. To that end, if one of these losers came out and identified himself as a any non-Christian person I'd give him much greater consideration to that end, simply because presents an opportunity for him to be different than the shitbags we've grown accustomed to in the white house.

Perhaps I am naïve (or a bitter, middle-aged, straight white male) but I WOULD expect a black president to behave the same as a white one. I don't (necessarily) mean make every decision the exact same way, but... if we're to believe what we're told, there should be NO DIFFERENCE because of race.  There either is or there isn't. 

I remember an op-ed around the time of Obama's inauguration that basically said that from this day forward there would be no excuses.   Meaning, Obama achieving the highest office in the land meant that the believe that the black man was held down by whitey had to go.  It meant that every other black man had to now rise and fall on his own merits, and couldn't blame the "glass ceiling", or "systemic racism" or any of those other, nebulous, intangible things that act as a built in excuse.    Now, clearly that op-ed was wrong - one need only do a cursory search of the newspaper to know that isn't happening. 

I think the issue with all these things is not whether they are or are not, it's what role it plays. I don't want a President making decisions BECAUSE he's black, Christian, atheist, Muslim, or white.  Those things can inform him, through experience, since that is the human experience, but in my view, that is as far as it goes.   What is more important is how his being a billionaire real estate developer or how (s)he has skated on not one but TWO major national security scandals informs his leadership.  That's where we start to see real differentiation.

You want real change in the oval office, stop electing people that are promising change and have no fucking clue how to get there. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 13, 2015, 11:58:28 AM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 13, 2015, 12:12:16 PM


I can't find much outside of 2000 and 2008 figures (showed people of religion preferred Bush and Romney by a landslide), but the fact that 0 out of the 535 members of congress identify as atheists is a pretty good indicator.

I can't find the exact chart, but when I was looking through the information about Bernie Sanders being a "Democratic Socialist", I found a poll that basically said that the two least electable demographics are "socialist" and "atheist". 

Here's my thought, for what it's worth:  "atheism" has to go through it's hip phase first, and people have to make sure the increasing numbers are really people that have assessed the situation at long length and ultimately decided "there is no God" or if it isn't a knee-jerk reaction to idiots like Ted Cruz.   It's still got the whiff of "hipster" to me, and it still has the whiff of "I don't like Joel Osteen, so I must be atheist".    I don't mean to offend anyone here who has done the deep spiritual dive (and I know of at least two people here that have) and have arrived at the conclusion that there is no supreme being, but as a general proposition that's what I'm seeing. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 13, 2015, 12:26:22 PM
I am not defending voting for a person because he's black. Let's get that right out of the way.

There is a difference between the two, though. Voting for a black candidate is voting for something very new and very different. I don't think anybody would expect a black president to behave the same as a white one, for better or for worse, and there is some appeal to that. Voting for a Christian president is insuring that, at least in that regard, you're getting ostensibly the same for the last 100 years. To that end, if one of these losers came out and identified himself as a any non-Christian person I'd give him much greater consideration to that end, simply because presents an opportunity for him to be different than the shitbags we've grown accustomed to in the white house.

Perhaps I am naïve (or a bitter, middle-aged, straight white male) but I WOULD expect a black president to behave the same as a white one. I don't (necessarily) mean make every decision the exact same way, but... if we're to believe what we're told, there should be NO DIFFERENCE because of race.  There either is or there isn't. 

I remember an op-ed around the time of Obama's inauguration that basically said that from this day forward there would be no excuses.   Meaning, Obama achieving the highest office in the land meant that the believe that the black man was held down by whitey had to go.  It meant that every other black man had to now rise and fall on his own merits, and couldn't blame the "glass ceiling", or "systemic racism" or any of those other, nebulous, intangible things that act as a built in excuse.    Now, clearly that op-ed was wrong - one need only do a cursory search of the newspaper to know that isn't happening. 

I think the issue with all these things is not whether they are or are not, it's what role it plays. I don't want a President making decisions BECAUSE he's black, Christian, atheist, Muslim, or white.  Those things can inform him, through experience, since that is the human experience, but in my view, that is as far as it goes.   What is more important is how his being a billionaire real estate developer or how (s)he has skated on not one but TWO major national security scandals informs his leadership.  That's where we start to see real differentiation.

You want real change in the oval office, stop electing people that are promising change and have no fucking clue how to get there.
I don't think anybody should make decisions based on their race or their religion. I think it's inevitable that those factors influence their decision making, though. Race more than religion since there's really no wiggle room in that one. I think most self-professed christian politicians are about as religious as I am and merely pay lip service. With one recent exception black people really are black.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 13, 2015, 12:30:05 PM
I'm not suggesting that the majority of congress should be atheist or anything like that. I just find it amazing, that in this day and age, there isn't a single one. Not one.

I look at this graphic (might be the one you're talking about) and just don't get it. Many of the religions are over-represented in congress. Only 73% of US adults are christian yet that demographic makes up 91.8% of the congress. 2% of Mormons in the adult population, but 3% in congress. 2% of the adult population is Jewish, but 5% of congress is. But when it comes to atheists/unaffiliated, they make up 20% of American adults, and only 1/5 of a percent of congress. Please don't take this as me suggesting that we evenly distribute the religious beliefs of congress to match those of the American people.

(https://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/congress.jpg)

I don't think it's too hard to say that a candidate's religious affiliation will determine their success in the polls.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 13, 2015, 01:32:28 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 13, 2015, 01:36:47 PM


I can't find much outside of 2000 and 2008 figures (showed people of religion preferred Bush and Romney by a landslide), but the fact that 0 out of the 535 members of congress identify as atheists is a pretty good indicator.

I can't find the exact chart, but when I was looking through the information about Bernie Sanders being a "Democratic Socialist", I found a poll that basically said that the two least electable demographics are "socialist" and "atheist". 

Here's my thought, for what it's worth:  "atheism" has to go through it's hip phase first, and people have to make sure the increasing numbers are really people that have assessed the situation at long length and ultimately decided "there is no God" or if it isn't a knee-jerk reaction to idiots like Ted Cruz.   It's still got the whiff of "hipster" to me, and it still has the whiff of "I don't like Joel Osteen, so I must be atheist".    I don't mean to offend anyone here who has done the deep spiritual dive (and I know of at least two people here that have) and have arrived at the conclusion that there is no supreme being, but as a general proposition that's what I'm seeing.

I think this attitude is extremely xenophobic. We don't demand that Christians have done that level of soul searching and question if their faith is legitimate. But simply not believing in God is somehow fair game to delegitimize the vast majority. That's more on you than atheists.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 13, 2015, 02:18:18 PM

I think this attitude is extremely xenophobic. We don't demand that Christians have done that level of soul searching and question if their faith is legitimate. But simply not believing in God is somehow fair game to delegitimize the vast majority. That's more on you than atheists.

That's a fair point, and one I won't shy away from.  Perhaps it IS more on me.  But where I was going was less about having every candidate soul-search and validate their faith than about taking the easy way out.   I think it is more than valid to assess whether someone is self-categorizing in order to curry favor or to avoid association.  This cuts both ways; I find it interesting that Obama is Christian when it is convenient to be so, and secular when it is convenient to be so.  It is part of his wishy washy character, and while his religion isn't a reason to vote for him (or not), his character is.

This is why I am copping to this.  I think there is a "popular" movement to disassociate with established churches.  To Chino's point, I think the "20%" is accurate, but I think the bulk of that ARE Christians, or at least spiritualists, that don't want to be associated with the "stigma" that exists in 2105 regarding organized religion.   

I disagree with Hitchens in a lot of way - I think he is pandering, I think some of his arguments are specious, and I think he guts logical corners - but I have no doubt whatsoever of the veracity of his beliefs.   If he was to run for President - if he was alive, and American - I wouldn't not vote for him because he is an atheist. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 13, 2015, 03:31:31 PM
That's still marginalizing atheists and agnostics, though. The vast majority are actually just Christians not wanting to belong to a church? Why not just acknowledge that atheists and agnostics do exist, and one being recognized as such should be taken at their word?

Christopher Hitchens is a journalist who died 4 years ago. I'd like to think there are other atheists you wouldn't hold being an atheist against, and it shouldn't take writing a book to be granted the legitimacy of one's lack of faith.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 13, 2015, 03:47:27 PM
Yeah, there actually is a fair amount of patronization directed at atheists and agnostics. I recall that Douglas Adams would describe himself as a radical atheist when asked. Not because there was anything radical about his atheism, but rather that he learned people would not question of badger him if he qualified it. Otherwise you get subjected to people who would assume you're just too stupid to know better and start babbling on about their understanding of Christianity. My experience down here is that if I introduce myself as an agnostic then people do leave me alone. My take on it has always been that agnostic just sounds more intelligent than atheist, so people wary about stirring up the pot.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on October 13, 2015, 04:47:43 PM
Exactly. I don't tell anyone I'm an atheist until I know them well. And I live in a pretty progressive area. I've even had friends (most recently a girl I studied with for 3 months before she asked, and I just said "I'm an atheist"), her response was "You can't be an atheist because you don't know 100% there isn't a god" (which is important to note - not the definition of an atheist.) She told me I should at least be an agnostic. No other group gets that. If someone tells me they're Catholic I don't say "psssh, you don't know 100% that God exists, Jesus is his son, the Eurachrist is a correct practice, the Bible is a holy book, or a holy inspired book, etc." We even see it from Stadler (those that don't post on MP don't realize that he's my closest friend on these boards), when he qualifies between atheism having a "hipster feel" and being kneejerk to whatever figure, the church, etc., but pointing out guys like Christopher Hitchens are the actual atheists.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 13, 2015, 07:10:44 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 13, 2015, 09:38:41 PM
I don't think so. All the active threads have intertwined so I'm not sure which topic goes where. Religion came up as a component of political campaigning, I think. The guns discussion is probably taking place in the Benghazi thread, I reckon.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 14, 2015, 07:58:04 AM
Exactly. I don't tell anyone I'm an atheist until I know them well. And I live in a pretty progressive area. I've even had friends (most recently a girl I studied with for 3 months before she asked, and I just said "I'm an atheist"), her response was "You can't be an atheist because you don't know 100% there isn't a god" (which is important to note - not the definition of an atheist.) She told me I should at least be an agnostic. No other group gets that. If someone tells me they're Catholic I don't say "psssh, you don't know 100% that God exists, Jesus is his son, the Eurachrist is a correct practice, the Bible is a holy book, or a holy inspired book, etc." We even see it from Stadler (those that don't post on MP don't realize that he's my closest friend on these boards), when he qualifies between atheism having a "hipster feel" and being kneejerk to whatever figure, the church, etc., but pointing out guys like Christopher Hitchens are the actual atheists.

I think I'm being misunderstood here, and it is totally on me, but still.   I'm not questioning all atheists.   And I would never get into that kind of accusatory discussion with an individual, though I would engage in whatever intellectual discussion you might want to have.   It'll be pretty clear in about five minutes whether someone (on both sides, mind you) is talking shit or has real understanding of the issues.   I'm talking about the idea that studies and surveys have typically put ATHEISM (and I know what that means) at around 4% to 6% of the population consistently.   Then you see these polls that don't - apparently - understand what the words mean (what exactly are "nones") and the number jumps from there to 20%.

My problem is with the reaction to that data.   One-fifth of the American population is NOT atheist.  They're just NOT.  They may be agnostic, they may be searching Christians, they may be lapsing Jews, they may be Muslim and afraid to commit to a sect here for various fears.   But to take them at their word when they are simply using the category that seems to reflect their confusion about their belief system more than their actual belief system, well...    I bring up Hitchens so often not for any other reason than he's the best example of the confusion that I often talk about (and to be fair, I don't think Portnoy311 shares this view) that he attacks GOD by attacking RELIGION.  There are entire passages of his book where he says "God is silly" because "[x religion] does this and that and the other thing".  They are not the same thing.  You can believe in the existence of a creator and not subscribe to any of the rituals and beliefs of established religion.  I guess technically you can do the reverse too, but it is harder and makes less sense.

I don't mean to marginalize anyone; I feel the same way about those that adhere to a religion.  Maybe it's having lived in the South, but when I first moved to Atlanta (Lawrenceville, actually) I can't tell you how many times I was asked - on initial conversation - "where do you worship?".  And it drove whether there would be a second conversation.  We weren't active church goers, so we didn't have a ton of close friends down there. And it struck me as a sort of self-serving and self-replicating kind of mindset.  I don't think there was a ton of thought put into that, either, and in some (albeit few) cases, I could sense that people were shopping churches like they shop for houses or neighborhoods or schools. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 14, 2015, 11:11:09 AM
Maybe it's having lived in the South, but when I first moved to Atlanta (Lawrenceville, actually) I can't tell you how many times I was asked - on initial conversation - "where do you worship?".  And it drove whether there would be a second conversation.   
Yes, that's what I was saying in...well, one of these threads.

That's how it is here in the south. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 14, 2015, 11:14:03 AM
Maybe it's having lived in the South, but when I first moved to Atlanta (Lawrenceville, actually) I can't tell you how many times I was asked - on initial conversation - "where do you worship?".  And it drove whether there would be a second conversation.   
Yes, that's what I was saying in...well, one of these threads.

That's how it is here in the south.

When I first started dating my girlfriend, the first thing every one of her family members (literally) asked me was what religion I was.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on October 14, 2015, 12:25:10 PM
Interesting. Down here that'd be considered rude. My upstairs neighbor for the last 6 or so years is a pastor, and he's never once asked, suggested or implied anything about my beliefs. He and I share a deep respect for the privacy of others, so I think he figures that unless somebody seeks his input then their beliefs are none of his business.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 14, 2015, 12:29:19 PM
That, or he saw the ankh you have tattooed on the center of your chest. 

My parents-in-law were easy.  I swear I am not making this up:  I'm old fashioned, so even though it's a second marriage for both of us, I asked her mom and dad (separately) for permission.   They both simply asked (separately) "Are you an asshole?  She's already had one of those.  Just don't be an asshole and you have my blessing.".   Religion was the furthest thing from their minds.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on October 14, 2015, 08:23:07 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 15, 2015, 06:48:24 AM
When I first started dating my girlfriend, the first thing every one of her family members (literally) asked me was what religion I was.
The correct response is "uncut" or "shmegma free".  They will stop asking.

I just responded with "I was raised catholic". When I go to weddings and stuff with them, I still get the communion and stuff as part of the act. Luckily I remember all the motions from my nine years in catholic school. I blend right in.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 15, 2015, 07:00:11 AM
When I first started dating my girlfriend, the first thing every one of her family members (literally) asked me was what religion I was.
The correct response is "uncut" or "shmegma free".  They will stop asking.

I just responded with "I was raised catholic". When I go to weddings and stuff with them, I still get the communion and stuff as part of the act. Luckily I remember all the motions from my nine years in catholic school. I blend right in.

You don't have to answer (or answer publicly) but what school?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 15, 2015, 07:02:44 AM
When I first started dating my girlfriend, the first thing every one of her family members (literally) asked me was what religion I was.
The correct response is "uncut" or "shmegma free".  They will stop asking.

I just responded with "I was raised catholic". When I go to weddings and stuff with them, I still get the communion and stuff as part of the act. Luckily I remember all the motions from my nine years in catholic school. I blend right in.

You don't have to answer (or answer publicly) but what school?

St. Mary Magdalene in Oakville for K-8, and Sacred Heart High in Waterbury for 9th grade. I transferred to Watertown High my sophomore year.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on October 15, 2015, 07:25:32 AM
When I first started dating my girlfriend, the first thing every one of her family members (literally) asked me was what religion I was.
The correct response is "uncut" or "shmegma free".  They will stop asking.

I just responded with "I was raised catholic". When I go to weddings and stuff with them, I still get the communion and stuff as part of the act. Luckily I remember all the motions from my nine years in catholic school. I blend right in.

You don't have to answer (or answer publicly) but what school?

St. Mary Magdalene in Oakville for K-8, and Sacred Heart High in Waterbury for 9th grade. I transferred to Watertown High my sophomore year.

You might be too old, but a very good friend of mine taught at Sacred Heart for two years; I chaperoned a ski trip to Montreal with him for the senior class.  I think this was '91, '92 timeframe. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on October 15, 2015, 08:22:21 AM
Too young. I didn't get to SHHS until 2002.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 15, 2015, 08:55:15 AM
I attended a Lutheran school run by my church from K-8.

I realize that is bush league compared to Catholic school lol.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on October 15, 2015, 09:20:27 AM
What do you mean by that?

I was also raised Catholic/went to Catholic schools for 13 years.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jasc15 on December 02, 2015, 01:45:42 PM
For fuck's sake.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/authorities-respond-report-shooting-san-bernardino-california-n472976
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 02, 2015, 02:08:44 PM
This seems like a different situation than a lone wolf gun-man. There are reports of 3 armed individuals as well as suspicious package found. Surprised the media haven't been throwing around the terrorist label yet.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on December 02, 2015, 02:09:12 PM
Upwards of 20 victims, 3 masked men on the loose.

God dammit. I don't know what else to say.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 02, 2015, 02:11:09 PM
Say what you want about Obama, but I feel terrible that he has to continually address this kind of shit. This is disgusting.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 02, 2015, 02:20:21 PM
Don't see how this can fuel the 'more gun control' sentiment when it has taken place in a strict gun control state. All it says is that if someone wants to do something like this it doesn't matter what the laws are.....they're going to do it.

At this point I can't help but think the attention the media gives these shootings isn't half the reason why they take place....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 02, 2015, 02:24:01 PM
There probably is an element of that.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 02, 2015, 02:29:41 PM
At this point I can't help but think the attention the media gives these shootings isn't half the reason why they take place....

There probably is an element of that.

and that's not to say I don't think it should be reported.....certainly it should....but man, we all know this will be on 24/7 from now until the next shiny object catches their attention. It's a huge incentive to a looney person or 'terrorist' minded individual to go ahead and 'do it'.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 02, 2015, 02:32:57 PM
Yeah, I know.

And if these are just douches out to kill people, or just crazy, they aren't "terrorists." 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 02, 2015, 02:41:53 PM
Yeah, I know.

And if these are just douches out to kill people, or just crazy, they aren't "terrorists."

you're right....but we know that word will be thrown around due to it's political value......just like 'gun control' will be and the rest of the usual tag lines. Sadly, human life has no value to a lot of people in the world and our country so there is no number of laws or creative descriptions of those people that will alter what they want to do.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 02, 2015, 03:35:35 PM
I don't feel bad for Obama at all. As stated, this happened in the state with some of if not the most strict gun laws. Also, if these were IS sympathizers then this a blow to Obama's weak stance on terrorism and national security not the state of gun control. Regardless, a lot of innocent people lost their lives because of these assholes who ever they are and I hope they are brought to justice.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 02, 2015, 03:59:32 PM
Yeah, but my esteemed Governor, Dannel Malloy has wasted no time tweeting out his call for "common sense" gun control...  completely and utterly disregarding that this was likely already in place in the state in which this happened.  Panderer. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 02, 2015, 05:02:54 PM
Until we know how the weapons were obtained trying to tie this into gun control--on either side--is silly. People bitch about the media and its role in covering these and promoting some sort of agenda, yet five or so people here are already politicizing this to some angle. I understand that it's just speculation, which I enjoy here as much as the next guy, but let's keep some perspective here.

I prefer to speculate on what these assholes were thinking. The problem with them being terrorists (in the American sense, that is) is that this just isn't a good target, unless these guys were too stupid to make it out of San Bernardino. Moreover, they shot some people then hauled ass out of there. Atypical. Three guys make it unlikely that it was a disgruntled employee or spurned lover, as does the high body count. If it's two guys then the glory-seeker angle is a possibility, but it's still odd to get in and out like that when there are so many more people to shoot. This whole thing is just, well, odd.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on December 02, 2015, 07:09:47 PM
Until we know how the weapons were obtained trying to tie this into gun control--on either side--is silly. People bitch about the media and its role in covering these and promoting some sort of agenda, yet five or so people here are already politicizing this to some angle. I understand that it's just speculation, which I enjoy here as much as the next guy, but let's keep some perspective here.


Yup, bingo.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 02, 2015, 07:13:18 PM
Disgusting acts by cowards.

Say what you want about Obama, but I feel terrible that he has to continually address this kind of shit. This is disgusting.

Er, what?  People are dying at the hands of maniacs, and Obama is one you feel terrible for? ???
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 03:55:43 AM
Yeah. I don't give a damn about the people killed.  ::) c'mon man.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 03, 2015, 07:38:50 AM
Until we know how the weapons were obtained trying to tie this into gun control--on either side--is silly. People bitch about the media and its role in covering these and promoting some sort of agenda, yet five or so people here are already politicizing this to some angle. I understand that it's just speculation, which I enjoy here as much as the next guy, but let's keep some perspective here.

I prefer to speculate on what these assholes were thinking. The problem with them being terrorists (in the American sense, that is) is that this just isn't a good target, unless these guys were too stupid to make it out of San Bernardino. Moreover, they shot some people then hauled ass out of there. Atypical. Three guys make it unlikely that it was a disgruntled employee or spurned lover, as does the high body count. If it's two guys then the glory-seeker angle is a possibility, but it's still odd to get in and out like that when there are so many more people to shoot. This whole thing is just, well, odd.

I'm down with this.   

And I agree totally with that last statement: this is VERY odd, and doesn't seem to fit any of the events "like" this that came before.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 07:43:24 AM
Until we know how the weapons were obtained trying to tie this into gun control--on either side--is silly. People bitch about the media and its role in covering these and promoting some sort of agenda, yet five or so people here are already politicizing this to some angle. I understand that it's just speculation, which I enjoy here as much as the next guy, but let's keep some perspective here.

I prefer to speculate on what these assholes were thinking. The problem with them being terrorists (in the American sense, that is) is that this just isn't a good target, unless these guys were too stupid to make it out of San Bernardino. Moreover, they shot some people then hauled ass out of there. Atypical. Three guys make it unlikely that it was a disgruntled employee or spurned lover, as does the high body count. If it's two guys then the glory-seeker angle is a possibility, but it's still odd to get in and out like that when there are so many more people to shoot. This whole thing is just, well, odd.

I'm down with this.   

And I agree totally with that last statement: this is VERY odd, and doesn't seem to fit any of the events "like" this that came before.

I read this morning that they had placed IEDs in the building ahead of time, and go-pros were found on the chest's of those killed in the SUV. Seems like the new thing to do is get FPV footage of your attack. These guys seem to be constantly trying to one-up each other.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 03, 2015, 07:47:25 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 07:49:52 AM
Is this the first female shooter we've seen in an incident like this?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/after-san-bernardino-ramage-probes-grapple-with-motives-questions-on-planning/2015/12/03/557f0e86-99ac-11e5-8917-653b65c809eb_story.html

Quote
Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, a former county health worker who was born in the United States, and a woman described as his Pakistani-born wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27.

... Just remembered one the the Vegas shooters (the girlfriend and boyfriend who had the shootout in a Walmart) was a female.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 08:10:38 AM
I'd hate to grow up knowing that the last interaction I had with my parents was them dumping me on another family member while they went out to slaughter and be slaughtered.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 03, 2015, 08:19:57 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb.

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 08:23:02 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb.

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....

Totally agree. But in all fairness, I can go home and make a remote detonated (with a 1/3 mile range) pipe bomb in about 20 minutes. I used to make them quite a bit in high school and in my early twenties. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 03, 2015, 08:25:13 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb.

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....

Totally agree. But in all fairness, I can go home and make a remote detonated (with a 1/3 mile range) pipe bomb in about 20 minutes. I used to make them quite a bit in high school and in my early twenties.

yeah.....we made a couple in high school as well.....geez.....I'm so glad that none of us blew our arms off, anyway......I know you understand my point in that they had those at the ready.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 03, 2015, 08:26:34 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb.

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....

Totally agree. But in all fairness, I can go home and make a remote detonated (with a 1/3 mile range) pipe bomb in about 20 minutes. I used to make them quite a bit in high school and in my early twenties.

yeah.....we made a couple in high school as well.....geez.....I'm so glad that none of us blew our arms off, anyway......I know you understand my point in that they had those at the ready.

I'm amazed that I still have all my fingers. If I ever have kids and see them doing the stuff I did, I'm going to have a heart attack.  :lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 03, 2015, 08:27:46 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb. Their names!

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....
As I said elsewhere, a guy named Sayed shoots somebody over a game of dominoes turned bad and it's called terrorism in this country. A defining characteristic of terrorism is the motivation, and we've simplified that all the way down to their religion. Easier for people to get on board with.

By the way, we had somebody GoPro a shooting a couple of months ago, and tons of people go home and "whip up" pipe bombs. Dillon and Kleebold had several of them and that was like 20 years ago.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 03, 2015, 08:29:17 AM
If the attacks are confirmed to be related to ISIS/Islamist Extremism I'll be very interested to hear the response from Obama as well as from the presidential candidates of both parties. This is the type of event that could greatly shake up the political landscape.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 03, 2015, 08:40:09 AM
If the attacks are confirmed to be related to ISIS/Islamist Extremism I'll be very interested to hear the response from Obama as well as from the presidential candidates of both parties. This is the type of event that could greatly shake up the political landscape.
If these people simply had a newspaper with an ISIL related headline they'll be linked to the group.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 03, 2015, 08:41:42 AM
There are reports of multiple middle eastern looking men going in and out of the residence and that the couple recently traveled to Saudi Arabia. May not mean much but with the high FBI presence from the get go it's starting to look like this is related to terrorism. Also interesting that they were caught from a public tip, presumably a neighbor who has been suspicious for awhile but was afraid to report them because they were afraid to be called racist. Also, these clowns just their baby off at grandma's before doing this. What the hell is wrong with people.

The media will dance around it because of how 'sensitive' the issue is but there's no doubt this was terrorism. The level of sophistication....Go Pro strapped to them to film.....pipe bombs.....etc etc.....you don't just run home and whip up a pipe bomb. Their names!

Anyway.....this was an act of terrorism, period. Any other description is nothing but white wash.....
As I said elsewhere, a guy named Sayed shoots somebody over a game of dominoes turned bad and it's called terrorism in this country. A defining characteristic of terrorism is the motivation, and we've simplified that all the way down to their religion. Easier for people to get on board with.

By the way, we had somebody GoPro a shooting a couple of months ago, and tons of people go home and "whip up" pipe bombs. Dillon and Kleebold had several of them and that was like 20 years ago.

Well...call it what you want. To whip up a pipe bomb you have to have the materials. Returning from a Middle Eastern trip with a pregnant wife and new buddies who frequent their home enough for the neighbors to take notice. Call me whatever....racist....paranoid....right wing conspiracy theorist......but I don't need things spelled out for me to see what this was and I'm not concerned about jumping the gun on judgment because I think the odds are in my favor here declaring this an act of terrorism. They didn't shoot people over dominos.....they returned from their house and executed what authorities have described as a very well thought out and tactical operation where they had a clear mission they wanted to accomplish.


If the attacks are confirmed to be related to ISIS/Islamist Extremism I'll be very interested to hear the response from Obama as well as from the presidential candidates of both parties. This is the type of event that could greatly shake up the political landscape.
If these people simply had a newspaper with an ISIL related headline they'll be linked to the group.

that group will be quick to claim them also.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 03, 2015, 09:03:11 AM
My position is that they might be actual terrorists, they might be ter'ists in the American sense and they might just simply be assholes. I really don't know, but I have zero faith in the American public to discern any of the possibilities, due to both ignorance and apathy.

Quote
that group will be quick to claim them also.....
Quite true. That doesn't make either of them correct, though.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 03, 2015, 09:17:43 AM
The Right want this to be international linked terrorism while the left want it to be a one off domestic mass shooter event. The different media outlets on both sides are already trying to spin the story in their favor. I honestly don't trust the media or the government enough at this point to paint an honest picture. I feel it's the job of the citizen to do their research and hear all of the different view points and listen to their gut. My gut is telling me that this is a Muslim Extremist terrorist attack based on the information given so far. Will Obama take as serious of stance if it is as the French have or will he continue to pander to the PC crowd?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 03, 2015, 09:23:36 AM
Would any coverage the media gives not be considered spin? Could any action Obama takes not be construed as pandering? It's just like that "judicial activism" nonsense where the distinction is based entirely on the individuals viewing position.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 03, 2015, 11:08:11 AM
Speaking of pandering, it annoys me to no end that no politician can refer to a terrorist attack without qualifying it as terrible, tragic, awful, deplorable and whatever else the thesaurus lists under "really fucked up." Every time I hear "the horrible events in Paris" or "the tragic events in 2001" it just sounds phony as all fuck; much like all the rest of their vapid droning.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 03, 2015, 12:18:15 PM
Yeah. I don't give a damn about the people killed.  ::) c'mon man.

I didn't say you said that.  I just think that, given what is going on, to express that you feel bad for the president because he has to address this is...odd.  No politician will ever get sympathy from me for what they have to deal with, since a) they signed up for it, and b) most are corrupt.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 05:41:14 AM
White House press conference...

Jonathan Karl -"Why is it every time there is a mass shooting you use it to push gun control legislation?"

Press secretary-"Because the president is trying to stop future mass shooting events from happening"

Jonathan Karl - "But you just acknowledged that it wouldn't have made any difference in this situation?"

Press secretary - "Yes but we're taking about the future"

Omg... I watch this stuff and it hurts my brain how little sense the people who govern this country make. At least have a valid answer to the question. Make sense! :facepalm:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 04, 2015, 07:00:41 AM
Can someone explain to me why this isn't getting the coverage that the Paris attacks did? And by coverage I mean terrorist coverage. Is it because of the smaller body count? These people were radicalized therefore it's terrorism in my book. The sad thing is that I can't say I'm surprised that the government (specifically the White House) and media are spinning this into another gun control debate. It seems like people care more about an attack that happened across the ocean than an attack that happened on our own soil. Blows my mind.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 04, 2015, 07:09:22 AM
Because the leaders of this country aren't doing their jobs and instead are using this tragedy to push agenda.  Not just the leaders, but the media as well.  It's really sad and it's not going to get better.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 04, 2015, 08:03:04 AM
Can someone explain to me why this isn't getting the coverage that the Paris attacks did?
For on thing it just wasn't as flashy. The Paris attacks was a very complex operation where as this was just a couple of guys shooting up a place. Second, for the first 24 hours it looked far more like a disgruntled employee or a hit than a terrorist act. They guy's name wasn't released until much later, and even then it was released in the context that he stormed out of a party and came back shooting.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 08:04:54 AM
Because the leaders of this country aren't doing their jobs and instead are using this tragedy to push agenda.  Not just the leaders, but the media as well.  It's really sad and it's not going to get better.
Exactly. They are using this evil to push there agenda, and they won't call it was it is. Terrorism. The president actually said perhaps its work related. Really?
Yeah, a weapons arsenal of semi automatic guns, and pipe bombs. And he brought his wife with him. That's the last time anyone takes his ham sandwich out of the fridge when it was clearly marked.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 04, 2015, 08:22:05 AM
it was released in the context that he stormed out of a party and came back shooting.

the entire context of this story is being heavily edited and watered down. This was a Radicalized Muslim who had stockpiled an arsenal.....had repeated Middle Eastern Men in and out of his house over the past few weeks/months.....then executed an attack with his Radicalized Wife in a fashion that Law Enforcement are describing as well planned and meticulous. The remaining survivors are lucky he didn't wire those pipe bombs correctly and his remote didn't detonate them.

There is absolutely no question that this was a terrorist attack by a Extremist Muslim. They aren't saying much about it because then they'd have to answer questions like....'where the  :censored are the men who've been visiting his house recently?'.......

EB, if I understand your point of view correctly I'm getting that you don't want to just 'lump' this in to a generalization about this being a 'terrorist attack' and that this is an "isolated" instance because it's not like this guy as an ISIS member. But, to me....ISIS...Al Quiada.....whoever......Muslim Extremists are an enemy and now they are doing what they've said they would do and that is hit home on American turf.....and it's not being called out for what it is.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 08:26:57 AM
it was released in the context that he stormed out of a party and came back shooting.

the entire context of this story is being heavily edited and watered down. This was a Radicalized Muslim who had stockpiled an arsenal.....had repeated Middle Eastern Men in and out of his house over the past few weeks/months.....then executed an attack with his Radicalized Wife in a fashion that Law Enforcement are describing as well planned and meticulous. The remaining survivors are lucky he didn't wire those pipe bombs correctly and his remote didn't detonate them.

There is absolutely no question that this was a terrorist attack by a Extremist Muslim. They aren't saying much about it because then they'd have to answer questions like....'where the  :censored are the men who've been visiting his house recently?'.......

EB, if I understand your point of view correctly I'm getting that you don't want to just 'lump' this in to a generalization about this being a 'terrorist attack' and that this is an "isolated" instance because it's not like this guy as an ISIS member. But, to me....ISIS...Al Quiada.....whoever......Muslim Extremists are an enemy and now they are doing what they've said they would do and that is hit home on American turf.....and it's not being called out for what it is.
Stop, Gary. Making sense is not allowed.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 04, 2015, 08:28:42 AM
Because the leaders of this country aren't doing their jobs and instead are using this tragedy to push agenda.  Not just the leaders, but the media as well.  It's really sad and it's not going to get better.
Exactly. They are using this evil to push there agenda, and they won't call it was it is. Terrorism. The president actually said perhaps its work related. Really?
Yeah, a weapons arsenal of semi automatic guns, and pipe bombs. And he brought his wife with him. That's the last time anyone takes his ham sandwich out of the fridge when it was clearly marked.
Just about the entire nation is using these things to push agendas. Every time one of these things happen you have the left and the right both praying that it's good for their side.

"Please be Moslem! Please be Moslem!"

"Please be crazy! Please be crazy!"

And personally, I don't want a president who goes off half cocked. While it certainly does appear to be Islam related, there's still the matter that the dude stormed out o the building pissed off and came back shooting. Ignoring that would be silly. Get all the facts and then make a judgement. That's the smart thing to do, and nothing he says or does is going to stop people from blasting him anyway.

edit: Gary, you're getting a longer response in a minute.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 04, 2015, 08:29:35 AM
And people wonder why Trump for all of his flaws and dipshit comments is still kicking ass in the polls. People are tired of politicians who just talk and don't do anything other than fight for personal agendas rather than what is the best interest for the country and it's CITIZENS.  The response to this by our government and media has been pathetic.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 04, 2015, 08:40:33 AM
it was released in the context that he stormed out of a party and came back shooting.
EB, if I understand your point of view correctly I'm getting that you don't want to just 'lump' this in to a generalization about this being a 'terrorist attack' and that this is an "isolated" instance because it's not like this guy as an ISIS member. But, to me....ISIS...Al Quiada.....whoever......Muslim Extremists are an enemy and now they are doing what they've said they would do and that is hit home on American turf.....and it's not being called out for what it is.
My position is thus: I don't want to jump to any conclusions. This could have gone either way at first, despite everybody's desire for this to be a ter'ist attack. Now it does seem to be the latter (at least in the American sense of the word). You can call it terrorism all you want now. I just think getting it right is important.  Moreover, (I haven't read any new developments, so this might have changed since yesterday) it seems that this guy was a pretty normal loner type who jetted off to the ME last year for the Hajj (which is perfectly reasonable). He met some chick and promptly married her before coming back here going out all guns blazing within six months. I'm thinking that ISIL is using hot chicks to dupe lowly saps into weaponizing themselves (which quite frankly is fucking brilliant). My hunch is that she's the terrorist (in the proper sense of the word) and he's just another dope who did insane stuff for a bit o tail.

And again I advise people to add Black Sunday to their Netflix.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 08:46:11 AM
Because the leaders of this country aren't doing their jobs and instead are using this tragedy to push agenda.  Not just the leaders, but the media as well.  It's really sad and it's not going to get better.
Exactly. They are using this evil to push there agenda, and they won't call it was it is. Terrorism. The president actually said perhaps its work related. Really?
Yeah, a weapons arsenal of semi automatic guns, and pipe bombs. And he brought his wife with him. That's the last time anyone takes his ham sandwich out of the fridge when it was clearly marked.
Just about the entire nation is using these things to push agendas. Every time one of these things happen you have the left and the right both praying that it's good for their side.

"Please be Moslem! Please be Moslem!"

"Please be crazy! Please be crazy!"

And personally, I don't want a president who goes off half cocked. While it certainly does appear to be Islam related, there's still the matter that the dude stormed out o the building pissed off and came back shooting. Ignoring that would be silly. Get all the facts and then make a judgement. That's the smart thing to do, and nothing he says or does is going to stop people from blasting him anyway.

edit: Gary, you're getting a longer response in a minute.
Where are you coming from? Do I seem like an ignorant toothless redneck to you?
I don't wish these things but lets see reality at least once in awhile. A half cocked president? How about a president who every once in awhile sees things for what they are and stops worrying about offending Muslims. SAY RADICAL ISLAM MR. PRESIDENT...YOU CAN DO IT!!!
He stormed out of the building pissed off and then came back shooting with his wife. Semi automatic weapons, pipe bombs, etc...
We need to tread lightly at this point? I can't take the silly anymore. Yeah...he was just plain old mad.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 04, 2015, 08:48:27 AM
it was released in the context that he stormed out of a party and came back shooting.
EB, if I understand your point of view correctly I'm getting that you don't want to just 'lump' this in to a generalization about this being a 'terrorist attack' and that this is an "isolated" instance because it's not like this guy as an ISIS member. But, to me....ISIS...Al Quiada.....whoever......Muslim Extremists are an enemy and now they are doing what they've said they would do and that is hit home on American turf.....and it's not being called out for what it is.
My position is thus: I don't want to jump to any conclusions. This could have gone either way at first, despite everybody's desire for this to be a ter'ist attack. Now it does seem to be the latter (at least in the American sense of the word). You can call it terrorism all you want now. I just think getting it right is important.  Moreover, (I haven't read any new developments, so this might have changed since yesterday) it seems that this guy was a pretty normal loner type who jetted off to the ME last year for the Hajj (which is perfectly reasonable). He met some chick and promptly married her before coming back here going out all guns blazing within six months. I'm thinking that ISIL is using hot chicks to dupe lowly saps into weaponizing themselves (which quite frankly is fucking brilliant). My hunch is that she's the terrorist (in the proper sense of the word) and he's just another dope who did insane stuff for a bit o tail.


I agree with the bolded.....his Father has said that he was a very devout and 'good' Muslim and so has his brother. You can see the looks on their faces and that hurt they have because this is a complete SHOCK to them....they are utterly devastated and confused. I can't imagine what they are going through....especially being Muslim and knowing that they are going to be scrutinized and essentially hated....but, to your point.....the ingredients seem right for him to have been 'lured to the darkside' but a bit of tail and the sweet voice of a woman.

And, one of the many flaws I have as a human is being impatient in situations like this and not jumping to conclusions per say but maybe not waiting for the entire story to be told before making my judgment on a situation. In this case, I personally don't need much more evidence because it seems pretty clear to me but I do know that's a flaw I need to work on.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 04, 2015, 09:05:26 AM
Rich: I have no idea why you took that as an attack on you. It certainly wasn't intended that way. I was pointing out that most of America was making assumptions and hoping their cause would be promoted within minutes of the news breaking.

Gary: the reason I'm annoyed by a lot of this is that I can't imagine what would have been a fast enough declaration of terrorism to appease the people who want to use this as an attack on Obama. He was saying "yeah, looks like it might well have been terrorism" mid-day yesterday. What he's said all along is that he'd like to let the FBI get all of the facts right, and people are translating that as "tip-toeing around, trying to not offend the Moslems." What was it that was the problem back when Benghazi was the rallying cry? Criticizing him for calling it "terrorism related" instead of "a terrorist attack," or something like that?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: mikeyd23 on December 04, 2015, 09:14:00 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-massacre-shooter-pledged-allegiance-to-isis-cnn/ar-AAg0Xpg?li=BBnb7Kz

Quote

U.S. investigators are evaluating evidence that Malik, a Pakistani native who had been living in Saudi Arabia when she married Farook, had pledged allegiance to Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, two U.S. officials told Reuters. They said the finding, if confirmed, could be a "game changer" in the investigation.


Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 04, 2015, 09:32:19 AM
The story about this guy going after tail and turning into a terrorist makes a lot of sense.

There is nothing wrong about getting the details before making a statement on the situation once the information has been gathered and processed.

There has been enough details at this point that we can clearly say this was a terrorist attack.

Now, what do the leaders of our country do? 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 10:46:13 AM
Rich: I have no idea why you took that as an attack on you. It certainly wasn't intended that way. I was pointing out that most of America was making assumptions and hoping their cause would be promoted within minutes of the news breaking.

Sorry, I thought I was being lumped into some lunatic demographic. Sometimes its hard to interpret someones meaning when its written rather than spoken.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 04, 2015, 10:53:31 AM


And personally, I don't want a president who goes off half cocked. While it certainly does appear to be Islam related, there's still the matter that the dude stormed out o the building pissed off and came back shooting. Ignoring that would be silly. Get all the facts and then make a judgement. That's the smart thing to do, and nothing he says or does is going to stop people from blasting him anyway.

Yes!  We want them to go off FULL COCKED!  Haha, I'm kidding; that joke makes me giggle every time.

Seriously, though, you're basically correct, even if I perhaps seem to fall into one of those sides at times.   Really, its testimony to why it keeps happening because there is no consistent theme, there is no consistent cause.   Yeah, this is "Islam related" in one sense, but at the end of the day, this is also likely a single actor just stirring up shit.  It may be in the name of Islam, but I can do anything and claim it is in the name of anything, and that doesn't necessarily tie that "named party" in to the cause and effect of the whole thing.   It's the "beauty" (if you'll allow me that word) of terrorism.   It all counts in the stat sheet towards the ultimate goal of making the common, peace-abiding citizen think twice or three times before carrying on about their normal day. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on December 04, 2015, 11:00:09 AM
The story about this guy going after tail and turning into a terrorist makes a lot of sense.

There is nothing wrong about getting the details before making a statement on the situation once the information has been gathered and processed.

There has been enough details at this point that we can clearly say this was a terrorist attack.

Now, what do the leaders of our country do?
What do our leaders do? Our leader with make it more about gun control even though its terrorism in this case. We need stricter background checks to help eliminate pipe bombs.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 04, 2015, 06:16:24 PM
I think the really sad thing is, how desensitized we all are to this kind of shit now.  I mean, this happened on Wednesday and I didn't hear a single word about it at work yesterday or today.  When 911 happened, it was all about anyone talked about for days, or even weeks.  Now, it's like, "Oh, another terrorist attack," and we move on.  That is sad.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on December 04, 2015, 06:21:08 PM
While that may be true to some extent, what I've noticed more than anything else about this incident in particular is that there really isn't anything to talk about.   

I've been scouring CNN and the info has just been unusually slow in coming IMO.   A few new details today, but I'm just reading up on that right now.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 04, 2015, 08:46:55 PM
While that may be true to some extent, what I've noticed more than anything else about this incident in particular is that there really isn't anything to talk about.   

I've been scouring CNN and the info has just been unusually slow in coming IMO.   A few new details today, but I'm just reading up on that right now.

Well it's intentional IMO. This is where there's a pretty evident media bias IMO. This was a terrorist attack performed by two people of which one has now been confirmed to have publicly pledged allegiance to ISIS and that fact is known. Of which....that person (the wife) was 'vetted' by the FBI and Homeland security prior to her getting her Visa to enter the country. What has Obama and his regime been saying about allowing Syrian refugees into America? Trust us....we will investigate EVERY one of them.....well, this just proves there is no possible way to detect someone or a group of people that want to bring this Holy War to America. (It is a Holy War, save your breath and key strokes trying to convince me it isn't) And, these two have had Middle Eastern men in and out of their house for months now....those dudes are still out there....most likely arming the next couple soldiers.....they certainly don't want to continually remind people of that.

Nothing about this story fits the narrative 95% of the news outlets have been pimping so they are going to give us the bare minimum and search desperately for another white cop who shot a black person or hope the next 'mass' shooting is a white christian NRA member male.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: orcus116 on December 04, 2015, 09:49:41 PM
While that may be true to some extent, what I've noticed more than anything else about this incident in particular is that there really isn't anything to talk about.   

I've been scouring CNN and the info has just been unusually slow in coming IMO.   A few new details today, but I'm just reading up on that right now.

I'm curious about the whole thing myself but I'm not sure where I can turn to look at facts without a narrative spin being put on it. I was at a bar Wednesday and they happened to have CNN on and just listening to the analysts who had ample time to sit and dream up their own opinions since there was nothing else going on I could tell that the types of discussions they were having were going to morph into whatever bias/lead narrative that would drive the rest of public opinion. I could just tell that media outlets were masturbating at the thought that if they had even a hint of an eastern sounding name for the shooters they could slap ISIS on it and call it a day to capitalize on headline and buzzword readers.

I think the really sad thing is, how desensitized we all are to this kind of shit now.  I mean, this happened on Wednesday and I didn't hear a single word about it at work yesterday or today.  When 911 happened, it was all about anyone talked about for days, or even weeks.  Now, it's like, "Oh, another terrorist attack," and we move on.  That is sad.

I don't mean to sound callous but I had the same reaction to when my mom brought up the Paris attacks at a family gathering a week or so ago: "what do you want me to do?". I heard about Paris on the radio for about 15 minutes and when I got home I just shut off all social media and just did my own thing. I don't need to wallow in that kind of crap especially when the reaction of most people is borderline cringe worthy with the amount of almost fake support people show. I'm at a point in my life where when I hear about things like this my gut reaction is "man that sucks but why should I give a shit?" especially considering there are much impactful things that affect me as a person on a day to day level that I need to worry about.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TL on December 05, 2015, 01:33:46 PM
It wasn't immediately classified as terrorism because the initial evidence didn't conclusively lead to terrorism. Simple as that. Early on, it seemed more like a disgruntled employee, or something with a very specific grudge or grievance (which still may be a factor).
Now that more information has come in, they are classifying it as terrorism. There is still a distinction to be made, since one of the assailants was a long time US citizen, and the ISIL affiliation seems very last minute; almost after the fact (they planned it themselves and then declared allegiance, vs it having been planned by a larger organization). It's an important distinction, because it determines the next course of action, and what steps should be considered to help prevent this sort of thing from happening again.

Whatever it had ended up being, there were going to be very real consequences, so it's very important in these situations to know pretty conclusively what the deal is before making declarations.

Quote
Of which....that person (the wife) was 'vetted' by the FBI and Homeland security prior to her getting her Visa to enter the country. What has Obama and his regime been saying about allowing Syrian refugees into America?
She wasn't a refugee (or Syrian). It's a completely different process. A refugee goes through a lot more scrutiny than the spouse of an American citizen.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 05, 2015, 08:59:17 PM
Quote
Of which....that person (the wife) was 'vetted' by the FBI and Homeland security prior to her getting her Visa to enter the country. What has Obama and his regime been saying about allowing Syrian refugees into America?
She wasn't a refugee (or Syrian). It's a completely different process. A refugee goes through a lot more scrutiny than the spouse of an American citizen.

Ehhhh.....use any color you want to paint it.....it still illustrates the fact that it is near absolutely impossible to detect Middle Eastern Radicalized Muslims through whatever vetting process our government says they have. Refugee or Fiancee'.....this chick was Radicalized prior to entering our country and she waltzed in here with an official Visa and the door wide open and forgot about the second she stepped off the plane...

If you (not specifically you...the generic term) think that ISIS and whichever other Muslim Extremist group out there who is anxious to kill Christians and Americans don't see the Refugee wagon Obama wants to roll out as a massive opportunity to invade....then your silly. I don't think EVERY refugee is a direct 'dangerous' threat (I think they're all a threat economically but that's a different thread) but it's almost a certainty that there would be a significant number of them who came here with the sole intention of carrying out attacks. That's the world we live in now and the type of war we are facing....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on December 05, 2015, 09:18:41 PM
Those that claim we live in the most peaceful time in human history are beginning look all like...

(https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r47/jammindude/alliswell_zpslrcq8cmu.gif~original)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 05, 2015, 10:49:37 PM

Ehhhh.....use any color you want to paint it.....it still illustrates the fact that it is near absolutely impossible to detect Middle Eastern Radicalized Muslims through whatever vetting process our government says they have. Refugee or Fiancee'.....this chick was Radicalized prior to entering our country and she waltzed in here with an official Visa and the door wide open and forgot about the second she stepped off the plane...

If you (not specifically you...the generic term) think that ISIS and whichever other Muslim Extremist group out there who is anxious to kill Christians and Americans don't see the Refugee wagon Obama wants to roll out as a massive opportunity to invade....then your silly. I don't think EVERY refugee is a direct 'dangerous' threat (I think they're all a threat economically but that's a different thread) but it's almost a certainty that there would be a significant number of them who came here with the sole intention of carrying out attacks. That's the world we live in now and the type of war we are facing....
You made a big show about how easy it is for a ter'ist to waltz right on in with a any number of visas. Yet you're worried about the refugee status folk who as a rule take over 2 years to get in and will now be the most heavily vetted group of people trying to gain entry. At this point I'd say that coming in as a Syrian refugee would be the least desirable option for a bad guy.

Which leads to the question I've been asking a lot lately, what do we do about it? Is there some plan for keeping out the ter'ists?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 06, 2015, 08:04:30 AM
Which leads to the question I've been asking a lot lately, what do we do about it? Is there some plan for keeping out the ter'ists?

I think the first thing we do is simply not allow or invite refugees to our country. People consistently whine about the US sticking our nose in everyone's business....well, here's a perfect chance for us to let Europe handle the issue.

And as far as keeping out the 'ter'ists'.....we're not going to. Just like if a psycho wants to get a gun and shoot 30 of his co-workers or 15 people at a mall.....he's going to get the gun no matter what. If the 'ter'ists' want to get into this country and execute terror strikes in public or whatever other method....they are going to. Like Fiorina points out at every debate...illegal immigration and our BS loose border protection has been an issue for 30+ years and both Repbs and Dems haven't done anything to strengthen it....when in actuality if they'd just enforce the existing laws it'd be stronger than it is.

Even if the refugees faced a more detailed background check I have zero faith in our government that it's really that tough....and even less faith if it were an obama cabinet/administration doing it. I'm sure 99% of those who'd enter are good folk....but I don't see the risk of the 1% that would most definately be coming here to do 'bad things' as a good risk to take especially when European countries are closer and better suited to take these people in.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on December 06, 2015, 09:01:02 PM
Anyone think the reporting on this has been really screwy?

I mean, the official Sheriff's Office Twitter account reported that there was definitely three shooters.   Witnesses still claim there were three shooters.   Many reports said "three white males".   Suddenly it's a Muslim married couple.

I'm NOT SAYING that the Muslim couple didn't do it.   It's just weird that multiple official reports said three shooters, they had a third person in custody (which they later changed the story to "we're not sure if the third person is involved or not) and now we're not hearing anything about the third person at all.

I'm only saying that on this incident in particular (moreso than other stories of this nature), the story has changed a lot, and then once the FBI took over....almost nothing. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on December 06, 2015, 09:03:16 PM
Just for reference.

https://twitter.com/sbcountysheriff/status/672172776489246720

"THREE people entered the building and began shooting"

Now, I'm going to turn around and say that the person in charge of the Twitter account could have been *anyone* at the Sheriff's Office...maybe just a computer tech hired for that purpose who was monitoring the radio.   But still....it does seem strange.   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on December 06, 2015, 11:05:44 PM
That's likely due to witness misinformation at the moment. It's not like the Sheriff was there updating his twitter feed. I wouldn't look into it too much.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on December 07, 2015, 12:41:24 AM
Kinda surprised no one has mentioned Obama's address. I didn't get to watch, I'm planning on catching up on it tomorrow. Did anyone see it? Thoughts?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 07, 2015, 05:57:28 AM
Kinda surprised no one has mentioned Obama's address. I didn't get to watch, I'm planning on catching up on it tomorrow. Did anyone see it? Thoughts?

I haven't had a chance to watch it yet. I saw a bunch of complaints on my FB newsfeed though. One said "Steps 1 and 2 for stopping terrorism... take our guns. Step 3, change the channel". 

Between January and the first half of November, 19,827,376 background checks were cleared for gun sales  ::)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 07, 2015, 06:32:01 AM
https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Weapons-Cache-Long-Island-New-York-Mark-Vicars-Federal-Air-Marshall-Gun-Loaded-Assault-Rifle-Car-Traffic-Stop-360582351.html

Quote
A Long Island man who allegedly pretended to be a federal air marshal when he was pulled over was arrested after authorities say they found a loaded pistol and assault rifle in his car, along with a knife, a ballistic body armor vest and a tactical vest containing three high capacity magazines.

Mark Vicars, 49, was driving on Jericho Turnpike in Syosset around 7:40 a.m. Thursday when Special Investigation Squad detectives, in a joint investigation with the Joint Terrorism Task Force's New York office and the Transportation Security Administration, initiated a traffic stop.

Vicars pulled his Dodge Durango over to the side of the road and activated emergency lights, policy say. He then produced a fake shield and identification credentials indicating he was a federal air marshal.

Authorities found the guns and armor in his car during the stop, they say. While executing a search warrant at Vicars' home in Syosset later, detectives recovered five other weapons, including two handguns and a Smith & Wesson revolver, along with 8,300 rounds of assorted ammunition.

That's pretty terrifying. I might be looking too far into it, but the fake cop car and the marshal credentials should be a serious red flag. I'd vet this guy's entire life to this point. Makes me wonder if he was going to be a second wave of attack. Some people go in and shoot up a building, police swarm in, this guy rolls up with his lights and tactical gear and starts picking off first responders from the outside.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 07, 2015, 07:07:47 AM
It was strange. He seemed like a rally cry and that he really was just going through the motions as this was something he really had to do. The safety of our country is going to be the primary issue for the presidential election now and the candidates better start making a plan to deal with that doesn't involve disarming the country or they don't stand a chance.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 07, 2015, 02:40:35 PM
Kinda surprised no one has mentioned Obama's address. I didn't get to watch, I'm planning on catching up on it tomorrow. Did anyone see it? Thoughts?

I haven't had a chance to watch it yet. I saw a bunch of complaints on my FB newsfeed though. One said "Steps 1 and 2 for stopping terrorism... take our guns. Step 3, change the channel". 

Between January and the first half of November, 19,827,376 background checks were cleared for gun sales  ::)

Im very close to adding myself to this list.  Just filled out a friend's reference for a gun permit as well.  I do not want a carry permit or anything, just for safety in my house.  Not terrorist related, but an acquaintance had an intruder in the house and the home owner (well he was the son of the home owner, my acquaintance) pulled out his gun and came storming down the stairs and the intruder immediately fled.   There has been a rise of home invasions in my area, so my thoughts aren't directly related to terrorism, but the rise of that has also been on my mind as another reason to feel safe at home.  Also, I am so against the anti-gun movement that I want a gun.  Whether or not I actually pull the trigger on this purchase still remains to be seen though as I am not totally comfortable with owning a gun just yet.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 07, 2015, 03:06:42 PM
You have any shooting experience? Any idea what you might want to own?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 07, 2015, 03:34:14 PM
You have any shooting experience? Any idea what you might want to own?

None to either so that's why I am very hesitant, I would need to do research and get to a range.  Probably something like a small pistol.    I do feel like if I owned a gun it would be my responsibility to know a lot more than I do now about it, I am owning up to that, and not just do the paperwork for the government.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 07, 2015, 03:51:50 PM
You have any shooting experience? Any idea what you might want to own?

None to either so that's why I am very hesitant, I would need to do research and get to a range.  Probably something like a small pistol.    I do feel like if I owned a gun it would be my responsibility to know a lot more than I do now about it, I am owning up to that, and not just do the paperwork for the government.
Unless you live in Camden or something I wouldn't really recommend gun ownership just for home defense. If you go out shooting with a buddy and develop an interest in it as a hobby then by all means. If you really do think you might need home defense, I'd probably suggest hanging with Uncle Mossberg. A good shotgun offers plenty of advantages for somebody such as yourself with your needs.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 07, 2015, 04:04:25 PM
You have any shooting experience? Any idea what you might want to own?

None to either so that's why I am very hesitant, I would need to do research and get to a range.  Probably something like a small pistol.    I do feel like if I owned a gun it would be my responsibility to know a lot more than I do now about it, I am owning up to that, and not just do the paperwork for the government.
Unless you live in Camden or something I wouldn't really recommend gun ownership just for home defense. If you go out shooting with a buddy and develop an interest in it as a hobby then by all means. If you really do think you might need home defense, I'd probably suggest hanging with Uncle Mossberg. A good shotgun offers plenty of advantages for somebody such as yourself with your needs.

Agreed. 'If' in the instance you 'had' to use it....there is some forgiveness when aiming a shotgun.....PLUS.....the sound of a round being racked by a shotgun at close quarters could be one of the more intimidating sounds out there....especially in the dead of night...
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 07, 2015, 08:28:33 PM
Kinda surprised no one has mentioned Obama's address. I didn't get to watch, I'm planning on catching up on it tomorrow. Did anyone see it? Thoughts?

He spent more time in his speech telling us to be nice to Muslims than he did on anything else.

In other words, when a few bad cops commit terrible acts, he won't have their backs, but when radical Muslims all over the world keep killing people, we are supposed to be nice to them.

Disgraceful.

I look back with utter shame at the fact that I voted for that guy in 2008 (even if, at the time, the vote was more against the GOP than anything).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 07, 2015, 09:14:54 PM
In other words, when a few bad cops commit terrible acts, he won't have their backs, but when radical Muslims all over the world keep killing people, we are supposed to be nice to them.
Wow.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 07, 2015, 09:35:25 PM
Wow is right.   It's sad that we've had two such disgraceful presidents in a row.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: portnoy311 on December 07, 2015, 09:54:22 PM
I think the wow is that it glosses over the millions of Muslims who are here as US citizens and have every right to protection as you and I. Obama was right when he said protection of the citizens is his utmost priority - and that includes the Muslims.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 08, 2015, 04:21:57 AM
Kinda surprised no one has mentioned Obama's address. I didn't get to watch, I'm planning on catching up on it tomorrow. Did anyone see it? Thoughts?

He spent more time in his speech telling us to be nice to Muslims than he did on anything else.

In other words, when a few bad cops commit terrible acts, he won't have their backs, but when radical Muslims all over the world keep killing people, we are supposed to be nice to them.

Disgraceful.

I look back with utter shame at the fact that I voted for that guy in 2008 (even if, at the time, the vote was more against the GOP than anything).

How has Obama turned his back on law enforcement or encouraged anyone else to do so?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 08, 2015, 07:59:55 AM
The wow covered about 5 different things. First and foremost trying to pick a preference between bad cops and radical Moslems, as if one were better than the other. Not even sure how I'd begin with that one. Last I checked we were still more likely to be killed by the police than by terrorists.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 08, 2015, 08:52:13 AM
Really?  We're really having this conversation?   Cops versus Muslims?  Why do we have to choose?   Why set it up so starkly? 

As for the comment that "we're more likely to be killed by the police than by terrorists" I suppose it's factually true (not counting 9/11, we're on pace for about 35 to 40 people being killed each year by terrorists; about 800 die per year at the hands of the police, though not all are shootings) but doesn't tell the full story.  I don't worry at all about being killed by the police because if - and that's a big "if" - I get in that situation, you best believe I am not going to be asking "why, officer?  What did I do, officer?  I don't submit to this inquiry, officer?  I DO NOT CONSENT!  I DO NOT CONSENT!" when they ask me to get on my knees and put my hands behind my head.   Having said that, it's apparent that I merely have to go to work or to see a concert to be subject to terrorist activity.  I don't control that in any way shape or form. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 08, 2015, 09:36:17 AM
Actually, I believe the way the conversation was framed was "Bad cops vs Moslems."
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 08, 2015, 07:32:50 PM
I think the wow is that it glosses over the millions of Muslims who are here as US citizens and have every right to protection as you and I. Obama was right when he said protection of the citizens is his utmost priority - and that includes the Muslims.

I agree, but his "be nice to Muslims" sentiment went on a bit too long; it dominated the latter half of his speech.

How has Obama turned his back on law enforcement or encouraged anyone else to do so?

I didn't say he had; I said he didn't have their back, which is true. 

The wow covered about 5 different things. First and foremost trying to pick a preference between bad cops and radical Moslems, as if one were better than the other. Not even sure how I'd begin with that one. Last I checked we were still more likely to be killed by the police than by terrorists.

Wow.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 08, 2015, 09:09:32 PM
No, you said he didn't have the backs of bad cops. If that's not what you meant then so be it, but it is what you posted.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 08, 2015, 09:21:44 PM
Moving right along, it seems the FBI is finally going to pay attention to police shootings now. I'm sure this is just coincidental timing, though. They'd be doing the same thing without all of the recent Outcry, right?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fbi-to-sharply-expand-system-for-tracking-fatal-police-shootings/2015/12/08/a60fbc16-9dd4-11e5-bce4-708fe33e3288_story.html

Quote
As of Tuesday, The Post had identified more than 900 fatal shootings by police — an average of nearly three deaths a day. By contrast, the FBI has recorded about 400 deaths a year over the past decade, or just over one death a day — less than half the rate recorded by The Post.

The FBI puts a helluva lot of effort into the UCR. Seems they just never gave a damn about police shootings.

Here's The Post's rundown (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/national/police-shootings/) of this year's 900 police shootings with some handy filters. Some of the unarmed shootings seem, um, a little dubious.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on December 09, 2015, 07:02:42 AM
Really?  We're really having this conversation?   Cops versus Muslims?  Why do we have to choose?   Why set it up so starkly? 

As for the comment that "we're more likely to be killed by the police than by terrorists" I suppose it's factually true (not counting 9/11, we're on pace for about 35 to 40 people being killed each year by terrorists; about 800 die per year at the hands of the police, though not all are shootings) but doesn't tell the full story.  I don't worry at all about being killed by the police because if - and that's a big "if" - I get in that situation, you best believe I am not going to be asking "why, officer?  What did I do, officer?  I don't submit to this inquiry, officer?  I DO NOT CONSENT!  I DO NOT CONSENT!" when they ask me to get on my knees and put my hands behind my head.   Having said that, it's apparent that I merely have to go to work or to see a concert to be subject to terrorist activity.  I don't control that in any way shape or form.

This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation. I agree that the civil liberties of all legal US citizens should be protected. I also agree that we should stop letting people into the country until we can figure out a process of weeding out bad apples.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on December 09, 2015, 09:25:27 AM
This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation.

Yep. All of the police shootings that have made the headlines and created all this outcry have one thing in common.....and that is those who were shot had just broken the law or were in the process of breaking the law and they refused to cooperate with police.....which led to them being shot.

The only exception I see is the little boy who was holding the fake gun.....but even then, he had made threatening gestures towards other kids with the weapon prior to the police arriving.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 09, 2015, 10:11:53 AM
This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation.

Yep. All of the police shootings that have made the headlines and created all this outcry have one thing in common.....and that is those who were shot had just broken the law or were in the process of breaking the law and they refused to cooperate with police.....which led to them being shot.

The only exception I see is the little boy who was holding the fake gun.....but even then, he had made threatening gestures towards other kids with the weapon prior to the police arriving.

Yea, it's pretty easy to avoid being shot by a cop.  Don't break the law.  If a terrorist wants to kill, you can just be the unlucky one who is in the line of fire. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 09, 2015, 10:37:14 AM
This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation.

Yep. All of the police shootings that have made the headlines and created all this outcry have one thing in common.....and that is those who were shot had just broken the law or were in the process of breaking the law and they refused to cooperate with police.....which led to them being shot.

The only exception I see is the little boy who was holding the fake gun.....but even then, he had made threatening gestures towards other kids with the weapon prior to the police arriving.

Yea, it's pretty easy to avoid being shot by a cop.  Don't break the law.  If a terrorist wants to kill, you can just be the unlucky one who is in the line of fire.
Or be in the same car as somebody that might have broken the law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Jeremy_Mardis).
Or live in a house that used to be owned by a dealer. (https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95475)
Or have your Beats up loud enough that you can't hear the police yelling at you (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/photo-raises-doubts-about-police-shooting-jermaine-mcbean-n366386).

And there are several examples of each of those happening just this year.

But this is all setting aside the fact that breaking the law and/or disobeying Johnny shouldn't justify being killed. And the fact that when it does happen the chances of it being properly adjudicated has only recently approached possible. As I keep saying, just because Johnny can legally justify shooting somebody doesn't mean that it was the right thing to do, and people need to be making that determination and quit being pussies about it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 09, 2015, 10:38:13 AM
I've moved my reply over the far more appropriate police brutality thread, since we're no longer on mass shootings.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 09, 2015, 10:55:36 AM
This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation.

Yep. All of the police shootings that have made the headlines and created all this outcry have one thing in common.....and that is those who were shot had just broken the law or were in the process of breaking the law and they refused to cooperate with police.....which led to them being shot.

The only exception I see is the little boy who was holding the fake gun.....but even then, he had made threatening gestures towards other kids with the weapon prior to the police arriving.

Yea, it's pretty easy to avoid being shot by a cop.  Don't break the law.  If a terrorist wants to kill, you can just be the unlucky one who is in the line of fire.

Only thing I'll say to this is that you never know. I was in a building on campus once that got evacuated because of a potential shooter. The RA of the room I was in failed to tell us about the evacuation. We heard commotion out in the hall, and next thing we know a SWAT team storms in and there's half a dozen shotguns being pointed at us with tactical strobes flashing. Those guys came in with no warning and we were all shit hammered drunk. I went to hide a bottle of booze in my pocket and had a shotgun within an foot of my head about a half a second later. Had that officer been a little more trigger happy or a little more fearful, my head could have been blown off before I realized the trigger was pulled.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on December 09, 2015, 11:12:13 AM
At that point, you're really stretching.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 09, 2015, 11:17:31 AM
I'm just saying... I can easily say I'd never put myself in a position to be shot and I had a loaded shotgun pointed at my face for literally sitting and moving my arm.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on December 09, 2015, 11:37:55 AM
I'm just saying... I can easily say I'd never put myself in a position to be shot and I had a loaded shotgun pointed at my face for literally sitting and moving my arm.

And you didn't get shot because you complied.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on December 09, 2015, 11:42:23 AM
I'm just saying... I can easily say I'd never put myself in a position to be shot and I had a loaded shotgun pointed at my face for literally sitting and moving my arm.

And you didn't get shot because you complied.

What about this guy?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-police-admit-accidentally-killing-tosh-0-production-assistant/
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 09, 2015, 11:51:21 AM
I'm just saying... I can easily say I'd never put myself in a position to be shot and I had a loaded shotgun pointed at my face for literally sitting and moving my arm.

And you didn't get shot because you complied.

What about this guy?

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-police-admit-accidentally-killing-tosh-0-production-assistant/ (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/los-angeles-police-admit-accidentally-killing-tosh-0-production-assistant/)
That was an interesting case as the LAPD cleared their own guys and prosecuted somebody else for the murder (and blamed Winkler for his own death).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 09, 2015, 01:35:51 PM
This. I have no concern about being shot by the police becasue I'd never put myself in that situation.

Yep. All of the police shootings that have made the headlines and created all this outcry have one thing in common.....and that is those who were shot had just broken the law or were in the process of breaking the law and they refused to cooperate with police.....which led to them being shot.

The only exception I see is the little boy who was holding the fake gun.....but even then, he had made threatening gestures towards other kids with the weapon prior to the police arriving.

Yea, it's pretty easy to avoid being shot by a cop.  Don't break the law.  If a terrorist wants to kill, you can just be the unlucky one who is in the line of fire.

Only thing I'll say to this is that you never know. I was in a building on campus once that got evacuated because of a potential shooter. The RA of the room I was in failed to tell us about the evacuation. We heard commotion out in the hall, and next thing we know a SWAT team storms in and there's half a dozen shotguns being pointed at us with tactical strobes flashing. Those guys came in with no warning and we were all shit hammered drunk. I went to hide a bottle of booze in my pocket and had a shotgun within an foot of my head about a half a second later. Had that officer been a little more trigger happy or a little more fearful, my head could have been blown off before I realized the trigger was pulled.

Of course you never know;  and I'm sure there was at least one person in the Bataclan or at the World Trade Center back in '01 that was all for death to the infidels.   Is it "impossible"?  No, I guess it's not.  I find it hard to believe, though, that there isn't ONE POINT in any of those that the actor could have diffused the situation enough to not take a bullet.   I'm sure they exist (for the same reasons we're talking about) but every single cop I know has a family and a conscience, and while they want to stay alive, they don't start a shift looking to cap anybody who mouths off.   So for me, the cop as "Ted Bundy" is a black swan.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 09, 2015, 01:54:20 PM
every single cop I know has a family and a conscience, and while they want to stay alive, they don't start a shift looking to cap anybody who mouths off.
I think this applies to almost all of them. I just think they need to be held accountable for their actions. The absence of malice is not a free pass. Moreover I think we need to address the mentality that says you shoot somebody at the first perception of risk. I want cops to be safe and go home, as well. That doesn't extend to paranoia, though. The stakes are too high.

And while I was typing that I kept thinking that you already get these things, so I'm really just clarifying here, methinks.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 10, 2015, 09:19:44 AM
every single cop I know has a family and a conscience, and while they want to stay alive, they don't start a shift looking to cap anybody who mouths off.
I think this applies to almost all of them. I just think they need to be held accountable for their actions. The absence of malice is not a free pass. Moreover I think we need to address the mentality that says you shoot somebody at the first perception of risk. I want cops to be safe and go home, as well. That doesn't extend to paranoia, though. The stakes are too high.

And while I was typing that I kept thinking that you already get these things, so I'm really just clarifying here, methinks.

I do, and we're firmly on the same page. It's probably worth going over one more time, though, as we compare them to terrorists, who have no interest in going home at night, and who ARE acting with malice.  Extreme malice.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 10, 2015, 09:24:02 AM
I must have missed where the terrorist comparison came up? Who's making this comparison? Somebody on this forum, politicians or activists?

edit: Oh, yeah. Kev did discussing Obama not supporting bad cops. I already dismissed that outright.

Never mind.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on December 10, 2015, 06:32:43 PM
Note: my comment was,  "In other words, when a few bad cops commit terrible acts, he won't have their backs, but when radical Muslims all over the world keep killing people, we are supposed to be nice to them."

When I said he won't have THEIR backs, I clearly meant their to mean ALL COPS, not the bad ones.  Perhaps I should have worded that better, but my intent should have been obvious. Then again, this is the internet.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 10, 2015, 07:37:37 PM
Did you have the same issue with syntax regarding the radical Muslims? Do you think he wants us to be nice to the bad ones too?

In the end none of this matters because your perception of Obama's actions is pretty significantly skewed by your personal beliefs; a conversation I'm having in another forum even as we speak. I don't think Obama "doesn't have the cop's back"  and I don't think we're supposed to coddle the terrorists. I think the stance on both is very similar. The overwhelming majority of both cops and Moslems are A-OK. There are a few bad ones that need to be dealt with and it'd be most helpful if the good ones would help weed out the bad ones; something neither group is willing to do.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 10, 2015, 08:42:26 PM
Just a timely update. The two cops involved in shooting the 6yo passenger in the example I posted the other day have been indicted.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-louisiana-shooting-idUSKBN0TT35S20151210?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

If my memory is correct, this is sort of a different example than what's normally bandied about here, in that these appear to be actual crooked cops rather than overzealous or mistaken ones. My recollection is that they had a personal beef with the guy driving, chased him down and shot the car all to hell. These guys shouldn't reflect on cops in general. However, it's something to notice that they figured they'd be able to get away with it, because, well they almost always would. A body camera on an unrelated cop and the unfortunate presence of the kid they didn't know about are what prevented this from being just another guy who was resisting arrest and got shot as a consequence.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 11, 2015, 08:30:21 AM
Did you have the same issue with syntax regarding the radical Muslims? Do you think he wants us to be nice to the bad ones too?

In the end none of this matters because your perception of Obama's actions is pretty significantly skewed by your personal beliefs; a conversation I'm having in another forum even as we speak. I don't think Obama "doesn't have the cop's back"  and I don't think we're supposed to coddle the terrorists. I think the stance on both is very similar. The overwhelming majority of both cops and Moslems are A-OK. There are a few bad ones that need to be dealt with and it'd be most helpful if the good ones would help weed out the bad ones; something neither group is willing to do.

As I think about this, I think you're both right in your own way.   Maybe blaming Obama isn't exactly right, but then again, he's nothing if not an astute reader of the temperature of the mob, and the mob doesn't give a shit about which good cops get swept up in the zeal to prosecute the bad ones.  But we're not ready (nor should we; two wrongs don't make a right) to let ANY good Muslims get swept up in the zeal to "end terrorism" (that's a euphemism).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 11, 2015, 08:34:20 AM
Did you have the same issue with syntax regarding the radical Muslims? Do you think he wants us to be nice to the bad ones too?

In the end none of this matters because your perception of Obama's actions is pretty significantly skewed by your personal beliefs; a conversation I'm having in another forum even as we speak. I don't think Obama "doesn't have the cop's back"  and I don't think we're supposed to coddle the terrorists. I think the stance on both is very similar. The overwhelming majority of both cops and Moslems are A-OK. There are a few bad ones that need to be dealt with and it'd be most helpful if the good ones would help weed out the bad ones; something neither group is willing to do.

As I think about this, I think you're both right in your own way.   Maybe blaming Obama isn't exactly right, but then again, he's nothing if not an astute reader of the temperature of the mob, and the mob doesn't give a shit about which good cops get swept up in the zeal to prosecute the bad ones.  But we're not ready (nor should we; two wrongs don't make a right) to let ANY good Muslims get swept up in the zeal to "end terrorism" (that's a euphemism).
Not arguing with you, but do you think that Obama has demonstrated a failure or unwillingness to support police?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 11, 2015, 09:17:50 AM
The overwhelming majority of both cops and Moslems are A-OK. There are a few bad ones that need to be dealt with and it'd be most helpful if the good ones would help weed out the bad ones; something neither group is willing to do.
This.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on December 11, 2015, 02:44:20 PM
Did you have the same issue with syntax regarding the radical Muslims? Do you think he wants us to be nice to the bad ones too?

In the end none of this matters because your perception of Obama's actions is pretty significantly skewed by your personal beliefs; a conversation I'm having in another forum even as we speak. I don't think Obama "doesn't have the cop's back"  and I don't think we're supposed to coddle the terrorists. I think the stance on both is very similar. The overwhelming majority of both cops and Moslems are A-OK. There are a few bad ones that need to be dealt with and it'd be most helpful if the good ones would help weed out the bad ones; something neither group is willing to do.

As I think about this, I think you're both right in your own way.   Maybe blaming Obama isn't exactly right, but then again, he's nothing if not an astute reader of the temperature of the mob, and the mob doesn't give a shit about which good cops get swept up in the zeal to prosecute the bad ones.  But we're not ready (nor should we; two wrongs don't make a right) to let ANY good Muslims get swept up in the zeal to "end terrorism" (that's a euphemism).
Not arguing with you, but do you think that Obama has demonstrated a failure or unwillingness to support police?

Not exactly, or if you need one word only, "no", but I think we're getting the typical Obama diplomacy; don't say anything too too bad about any one side, use the same buzzwords about accountability, and for sure don't say anything that seems to bite the hand that feeds.

I'm not a big one on "what a President should say", and I haven't fully decided if this is totally fair or not, but I had the initial thought that I haven't shaken yet that it would be informative if he made a statement to the effect of "we will call on our civic leaders to conduct meaningful investigations into wrong doings, we will hold those police officers that use exceedingly poor judgment when holding the balance of life in their hands, but as part of this compact, as part of our obligations as citizens, we must remember that we have an obligation too, an obligation to respect that most cops are doing their job.  Freeze when they ask you to freeze, hold your hands where they can see them when they ask you to, and otherwise take into account that you, too, have a role in keeping everyone in that encounter safe." 

To my knowledge, he has done nothing of the sort.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on December 11, 2015, 02:57:03 PM
Sounds like a pretty good proposal.

Obama's overall stance seem to me to be that most of the cops are good guys, but there are some of them doing some very bad things. A lot of people will consider that "not having somebody's back." Commenting on one of the victims is "throwing all the good ones under the bus." The guys in the police forum are just livid that he hasn't done more to show support. I don't see why pointing out something bad necessarily requires saying something good at the same time. I just find all of this as simple as blaming the whole thing on racism.

I'm increasingly of the opinion that the role of the president is to be a cheerleader, and preferably one for your side.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on January 08, 2016, 11:29:38 AM
Just read the below op-ed piece by Taya Kyle the widow of Chris Kyle (The American Sniper). She sums up my feeling on the topic perfectly.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/opinions/taya-kyle-gun-control/index.html
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on January 08, 2016, 12:03:59 PM
Just read the below op-ed piece by Taya Kyle the widow of Chris Kyle (The American Sniper). She sums up my feeling on the topic perfectly.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/opinions/taya-kyle-gun-control/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/07/opinions/taya-kyle-gun-control/index.html)
She's kind of all over the place, but from what I gather she blames HIPPA more than the fact that the guy who shot her hold man was able to legally buy a gun. I'm a gun rights supporter and gun owner, but she's not who'd I want representing me.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on February 11, 2016, 07:02:44 AM
Wanted to share this story since I think it is a great representation of how mental health is huge issue in these situations.

Many years ago, my wife & I worked at Red Lobster (where we met actually). Anyway, we still have a few friends who work there and get hear the horror stories of working in the restaurant service industry. Apparently, they hired this guy who turned out to be complete nutjob. Crazy in every sense of the word. He ended up getting fired and then decided to threaten to shoot the place up and actually told one of my friends he was going to kill her. He's been posting on facebook about shooting the place up and how there is going to be a "Red Lobster Valentines Day Massacre". Needless to say the police were alerted. They were already aware of this guy and had at one point found him locked in his apartment where he was naked claiming to be Jesus. As of now I don't think the police have done anything, but it's a good example of the system is really incapable of dealing with crazy people. In a lot of mass shootings you always seem to hear about how people were surprised that the person would do something like killing a bunch of people. I'm not sure that is truly the case and would almost guarantee that at some point someone knew there were some screws loose and didn't or couldn't do anything about it. Either way the system need an overhaul.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on February 11, 2016, 07:21:03 AM
Wanted to share this story since I think it is a great representation of how mental health is huge issue in these situations.

Many years ago, my wife & I worked at Red Lobster (where we met actually). Anyway, we still have a few friends who work there and get hear the horror stories of working in the restaurant service industry. Apparently, they hired this guy who turned out to be complete nutjob. Crazy in every sense of the word. He ended up getting fired and then decided to threaten to shoot the place up and actually told one of my friends he was going to kill her. He's been posting on facebook about shooting the place up and how there is going to be a "Red Lobster Valentines Day Massacre". Needless to say the police were alerted. They were already aware of this guy and had at one point found him locked in his apartment where he was naked claiming to be Jesus. As of now I don't think the police have done anything, but it's a good example of the system is really incapable of dealing with crazy people. In a lot of mass shootings you always seem to hear about how people were surprised that the person would do something like killing a bunch of people. I'm not sure that is truly the case and would almost guarantee that at some point someone knew there were some screws loose and didn't or couldn't do anything about it. Either way the system need an overhaul.

This is a great (in the sense of informative and telling) story.  There are all kinds of humans, right?  Outgoing talkative types, and quiet introverts.  People that talk about all the things they're going to do, and maybe they do some, maybe they don't.  Then there's those that shut up and do. 

That guy was nuts, clearly.  And his thing was talking about it and making a scene, and so people could prepare.   Now, take that story, change NOTHING except for "talker" to "doer" and you've got no notice and 15 dead innocents.   The line is razor thin, and sometimes you don't even know there's a line there. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on February 11, 2016, 07:58:32 AM
Wanted to share this story since I think it is a great representation of how mental health is huge issue in these situations.

Many years ago, my wife & I worked at Red Lobster (where we met actually). Anyway, we still have a few friends who work there and get hear the horror stories of working in the restaurant service industry. Apparently, they hired this guy who turned out to be complete nutjob. Crazy in every sense of the word. He ended up getting fired and then decided to threaten to shoot the place up and actually told one of my friends he was going to kill her. He's been posting on facebook about shooting the place up and how there is going to be a "Red Lobster Valentines Day Massacre". Needless to say the police were alerted. They were already aware of this guy and had at one point found him locked in his apartment where he was naked claiming to be Jesus. As of now I don't think the police have done anything, but it's a good example of the system is really incapable of dealing with crazy people. In a lot of mass shootings you always seem to hear about how people were surprised that the person would do something like killing a bunch of people. I'm not sure that is truly the case and would almost guarantee that at some point someone knew there were some screws loose and didn't or couldn't do anything about it. Either way the system need an overhaul.

Definitely illustrates how incapable 'the system' is of doing anything about nut jobs. And, it illustrates once again why when I'm dining out with my family I make sure to request the table/booth where I can see as many entrances and exits as possible....and why I conceal and carry. We love Red Lobster (and to dine out with the family for that matter)....and if that dude decided to do that whilst I was there dining with my family he'd get maybe two rounds off before he had some return fire. This is a perfect example for a couple different points of view for sure.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on February 11, 2016, 08:16:12 AM
I'll throw out the alternative point of view then. To me it's a fine example of how we still have a little freedom left to be eccentric or full of shit without finding ourselves 5150'd. I would certainly be mindful of the guy and what he's up to; I'm not an idiot. I would just suggest that for every person who's a doer, as Stadler describes, there are a hundred talkers. At some point you have to decide what your threshold for risk is as it pertains to allowing the talkers to be full of it. You don't go hardcore against the talkers expecting to prevent every shooting; it wouldn't work and you wouldn't like the consequences. As I've said time and time again, the occasional asshole or guy gone off his nut shooting some people is the price we pay for the freedoms we still have left, and part of that stems from the slowness of authoritative action in situations like this, where The Man is obliged to take his time and give people a certain amount of rope before snatching him up.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on February 11, 2016, 12:19:53 PM
And now a question for GMD: does the NRA actually represent you or your gun-toting values? You strike me as a textbook example of lawful, gun carrying Americans, which should in theory make you exactly what the NRA purports itself to advocate for.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on February 11, 2016, 05:00:39 PM
And now a question for GMD: does the NRA actually represent you or your gun-toting values? You strike me as a textbook example of lawful, gun carrying Americans, which should in theory make you exactly what the NRA purports itself to advocate for.

I've become more and more disenfranchised with the NRA as time goes on. I think at this point they are no better than one of the 'evil' corporations that have their hands up politicians back sides and treating them like puppets.

I did not renew my membership last year and am ignoring the phone calls and requests to do so this year. I think there are some good aspects to the NRA...i really liked the monthly magazine just due to the info. on new guns and weapons....but they are just like a Democrat or Republican when faced with a point blank question....they refuse to answer it and just spew the finely prepared rhetoric.

So...as much as I'd love for them to be advocating for 'me' and the law abiding citizenry you speak of...I think their leadership is no different that say the leadership of Unions and powerful companies. So entrenched and drunk on the wealth and power of their positions that they dig in even deeper and really refuse to 'work' with anyone.

Hope that mini rant answered your question EB.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on February 11, 2016, 06:50:45 PM
Yup, and pretty much what I was expecting. Honestly, they're in a pretty tough spot. They're first and foremost the lobbying arm of the gun manufacturers, which puts them in conflict with a great many of the people they're supposed to be representing. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: DragonAttack on February 21, 2016, 12:28:13 PM
My stepdaughter's former high school had a shooting in their cafeteria four years ago.  My niece had her college shut down last fall for a week due to the possibility a formerly suspended student, just kicked out of his frat, was coming back armed with his parents' rifle.  He was found dead from a self-inflicted wound days later.

Two policeman killed at a Panera in Bel Air, Maryland recently.  Used to stop by occasionally when I worked nearby.

Johns Hopkins Hospital:  a couple years after I left, an upset son shoots a doctor in the chest, and then his dying mother and himself.

Yesterday, another rampage, this time in Kalamazoo (where I lived for fifteen years).  Six dead at various locations.  The yearly average for the county is about 20 (the city has its 'normal' (?) drug-related shootings).  The amount of coverage so far has been almost nonexistent.

None of these incidents involved terrorists, but mentally deranged white guys. Another sad occurrence. ...until the next one.....and the next.....

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Calvin6s on February 21, 2016, 03:17:52 PM
a
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: DragonAttack on March 03, 2016, 12:56:30 PM
Since Kzoo, we've had Kansas and Seattle.  This week was a shooting spree at a high school in Ohio (which was mentioned 12 minutes into a local station's broadcast that day).  The February homicide total for Baltimore was 24. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on March 03, 2016, 01:58:15 PM
What ever came of that Ohio school shooting? The news dropped that pretty quick. Probably because no one died. Your reference in regards to Baltimore's homicide rate is more telling of the gang violence than guns. The people committing those murders would get their hands on a gun regardless of how strict the background checks are.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: DragonAttack on March 03, 2016, 10:15:23 PM
Ohio...I can't find much info on it.

Balto....a couple of the homicides were stabbings.  I was simply listing the total.  Kind of a 'ho hum, just another normal month in Charm City'.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 01, 2016, 12:22:03 PM
Unreal what's going on at UCLA (a gun free zone). Been reading live updates on Reddit from people locked down in buildings. Apparently there are 3 or 4 shooters systematically moving through different parts of campus. Seems like this was coordinated and pre-planned.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 12:32:24 PM
Just in time for election season.   :\
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 01, 2016, 12:44:17 PM
Just in time for election season.   :\

Trump: Focus on gun rights and allow students to carry
Hillary: Call for stricter gun control
Sanders: We need to focus on mental health
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 01, 2016, 12:48:45 PM
Trump: Focus on gun rights and allow students to carry
Hillary: Call for stricter gun control
Sanders: We need to focus on mental health

$2 to the person who guesses which one of these I'd support
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 12:49:06 PM
Just in time for election season.   :\

Trump: Focus on gun rights and allow students to carry
Hillary: Call for stricter gun control
Sanders: We need to focus on mental health

Well, I can tell you which one of those I disagree with.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 01, 2016, 12:50:59 PM
Lump me in with the allowing students to carry.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 01, 2016, 12:54:03 PM
As someone who has been around guns all his life, I don't see why we can't do things like SOME more gun control while still reinforcing gun rights for law-abiding citizens. 

Nothing really sensible ever gets suggested by lawmakers, only really crazy shit (on both sides).  Gun rights enthusiasts can't reconcile their desire for unadulterated 2nd Amendment "freedom", and gun control zealots can't understand the POVs of gun enthusiasts at all.

So nothing will ever be done that will actually help anyone.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 01, 2016, 12:55:07 PM
Lump me in with the allowing students to carry.

Not for GI Joe heroics either, running around the school looking for the gunmen to shoot them would just get you shot by authorities. But if you're armed, you stay in one spot barracaded in a room and if he/they come in....you're in a tactical position to execute several shots, probably to the upper chest/head area, and protect yourself.

I'm in an office building right now as we speak perfectly able to execute that plan if the situated called for it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 01, 2016, 12:56:28 PM
Lump me in with the allowing students to carry.

Not for GI Joe heroics either, running around the school looking for the gunmen to shoot them would just get you shot by authorities. But if you're armed, you stay in one spot barracaded in a room and if he/they come in....you're in a tactical position to execute several shots, probably to the upper chest/head area, and protect yourself.

No doubt. I wouldn't go looking for the gunman, but you can bet that if I was locked up in a library on that campus right now, I'd have my hand on my holster.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 01:02:10 PM
Lump me in with the allowing students to carry.

Not for GI Joe heroics either, running around the school looking for the gunmen to shoot them would just get you shot by authorities. But if you're armed, you stay in one spot barracaded in a room and if he/they come in....you're in a tactical position to execute several shots, probably to the upper chest/head area, and protect yourself.

No doubt. I wouldn't go looking for the gunman, but you can bet that if I was locked up in a library on that campus right now, I'd have my hand on my holster.

To protect those around you.

Except I believe that if it was known that more people were carrying around weapons legally, there would be less shootings of this nature. If not, if the fact that someone else being there with a weapon doesn't discourage said shooter, then there's obvious some mental issue and has nothing to do with anything else.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 01, 2016, 01:34:59 PM
Disregard
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 01, 2016, 01:40:19 PM
Lump me in with the allowing students to carry.

Not for GI Joe heroics either, running around the school looking for the gunmen to shoot them would just get you shot by authorities. But if you're armed, you stay in one spot barracaded in a room and if he/they come in....you're in a tactical position to execute several shots, probably to the upper chest/head area, and protect yourself.

No doubt. I wouldn't go looking for the gunman, but you can bet that if I was locked up in a library on that campus right now, I'd have my hand on my holster.

To protect those around you.

Except I believe that if it was known that more people were carrying around weapons legally, there would be less shootings of this nature. If not, if the fact that someone else being there with a weapon doesn't discourage said shooter, then there's obvious some mental issue and has nothing to do with anything else.

The fact that many of these end with the shooters killing themselves suggests that other people being armed wouldn't change much. Also, attributing it all to mental illness is just overlooking a lot of other things.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 01:48:03 PM
I would like to think that someone of sound mind and complete mental stability wouldn't off a handful of people and then themselves. To me, that points to deep-seated issues. Maybe not every case is so easily explained away, but from what we know of shootings over the last few years, these were people who had the types of mental issues that would lead to drastic behavior.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 01, 2016, 01:49:41 PM
I would like to think that someone of sound mind and complete mental stability wouldn't off a handful of people and then themselves. To me, that points to deep-seated issues. Maybe not every case is so easily explained away, but from what we know of shootings over the last few years, these were people who had the types of mental issues that would lead to drastic behavior.

Some. But no, not all. But your post makes a point, the reason we generally say they do, is because people don't like the idea of someone with a sound mind doing those things. But.......sometimes they do.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 01, 2016, 01:57:28 PM
I agree with Adami.

We definitely need to focus more energy in this country on mental health, but that won't solve the entire gun violence problem.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 01, 2016, 02:01:13 PM
I also say this coming from a country where people tend to go on murder/suicide missions and are mentally fine.

I know America is a bit different, but it does go to show that people can be easily driven to do those things by ideas, beliefs or emotions and can be mentally stable.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 02:03:17 PM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 01, 2016, 02:04:27 PM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 01, 2016, 03:32:13 PM
As someone who has been around guns all his life, I don't see why we can't do things like SOME more gun control while still reinforcing gun rights for law-abiding citizens. 
Because you're either with us or you're against us. Americans have lost site of the midground. What amazes me is the support (dwindling though it may be) for the NRA. A huge chunk of its members really want that middle ground, but as the lobbying wing of the gun manufacturers it can't afford compromise.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 01, 2016, 03:43:21 PM
Unreal what's going on at UCLA (a gun free zone). Been reading live updates on Reddit from people locked down in buildings. Apparently there are 3 or 4 shooters systematically moving through different parts of campus. Seems like this was coordinated and pre-planned.
Amazing how terrible eye-witness reports so often are. Seems to be your run of the mill murder-suicide.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 01, 2016, 03:49:29 PM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).

I'm talking about what the thread title refers too...shootings. Not just gun violence in general. I think you're lumping everything into one category and, unfortunately, it's not that simple. Speaking of the "dangers" of guns, why is it that nobody talks about the lives that have been saved because someone who has a carry permit stopped someone from killing people? Just because it isn't in your face in the media doesn't mean it hasn't happened. More lives have been saved than lost due to guns.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 01, 2016, 04:17:59 PM
As someone who has been around guns all his life, I don't see why we can't do things like SOME more gun control while still reinforcing gun rights for law-abiding citizens. 
Because you're either with us or you're against us. Americans have lost site of the midground. What amazes me is the support (dwindling though it may be) for the NRA. A huge chunk of its members really want that middle ground, but as the lobbying wing of the gun manufacturers it can't afford compromise.

Thusly, I am no longer a member. I'm all for my gun rights but the NRA has clearly gone bananas. There IS a middle ground out there to be had but neither side of the "fight" wants to give an inch and clearly does not want a middle ground. There's no money to be made in the middle.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 01, 2016, 05:02:43 PM
As someone who has been around guns all his life, I don't see why we can't do things like SOME more gun control while still reinforcing gun rights for law-abiding citizens. 
Because you're either with us or you're against us. Americans have lost site of the midground. What amazes me is the support (dwindling though it may be) for the NRA. A huge chunk of its members really want that middle ground, but as the lobbying wing of the gun manufacturers it can't afford compromise.

Thusly, I am no longer a member. I'm all for my gun rights but the NRA has clearly gone bananas. There IS a middle ground out there to be had but neither side of the "fight" wants to give an inch and clearly does not want a middle ground. There's no money to be made in the middle.
Just out of curiosity, have you seen anything from the left that actually suggests no compromise? I thought  much of the proposed legislation after Sandy Hook was pointless and silly, but it was a far cry from the extreme of disarming everybody that many of the right are afraid of. I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 02, 2016, 01:36:34 AM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).

I'm talking about what the thread title refers too...shootings. Not just gun violence in general. I think you're lumping everything into one category and, unfortunately, it's not that simple. Speaking of the "dangers" of guns, why is it that nobody talks about the lives that have been saved because someone who has a carry permit stopped someone from killing people? Just because it isn't in your face in the media doesn't mean it hasn't happened. More lives have been saved than lost due to guns.

I have no idea why you're defending gun laws to me. I'm not talking about them. And I wasn't lumping all gun violence together.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 02, 2016, 06:21:51 AM
I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Not that I've seen. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 02, 2016, 06:54:35 AM
I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Not that I've seen.

No. They haven't. The biggest complaints I've heard from anyone I know who's into guns are 1) magazine capacity is now limited. 2) You can't just buy a shotgun anymore, you need to a license or some in depth paperwork. And those things were governor Malloy's doing, not Obama's. As far as anyone actually having a gun taken away, it's just not happening. For eight whole years now it's been the same old "Obama's coming for your guns". The guy hasn't done anything about it. The second amendment is no less in tact today than it was in 2007.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 02, 2016, 07:29:05 AM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).

Adami, you're a very smart person with a very cogent point of view but I would suggest that perhaps you're defining "mental health" far too narrowly.  It's not just raving lunatics (not a scientific term) that a) commit these acts, or b) could benefit from mental health programs.   I am - I believe - perfectly sane, no suicidal or homicidal (except for my ex-wife) thoughts whatsoever, and with no major psychological traumas in my life (relatively speaking) and yet I see a therapist weekly without fail.   And even I have issues in terms of channeling harmful emotions in a way that aren't harmful to those around me (I don't mean shooting them, I mean in terms of anger-type responses). 

I don't disagree that there isn't a silver bullet here (pun intended).  It's likely a multi-pronged approach; but taking the guns away - as if these are recalcitrant kids who should be deprived of TV before dinner - is an overly simplistic, and not well-though out or researched approach.   

I still maintain the people that commit these heinous acts are secular versions of the people that flew those planes into the World Trade Center/Pentagon.  It's the same (or similar) mental mindset. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 02, 2016, 07:44:23 AM
First and foremost, please don't take this post as a suggestion that we shouldn't take steps toward progress. One thing I think people forget is how complex the human brain is. There are deformities, chemical imbalances, trauma, and a long list of other things that can effect how one processes their surroundings and their role/value within it. This could lead to years of mental anguish, or cause a completely normal person to fly off the handle in an instant. You could take away every gun and knife in the world, and have a psychiatrist for every person on the planet, and we'd still see horrible stuff like this happen. That's the downside about have the most complicated object (that we know of) in the universe controlling our bodies. Clearly, slapping a "gun free zone" sign on a building is nothing more than a delusional, feel-good pipe dream. Saying "we don't have enough mental health facilities in this county", while valid, isn't the true underlying cause of all of these acts.

When I sit on discussions related to this topic, it amazes me how often someone will say "If everyone was armed, no one would try this sort of thing". Really? Do people truly believe that? Cops are armed and wear bullet proof vests, and we've seen several of them executed in broad daylight over the last couple years. We've had gunmen go into army bases and open fire. If someone like the shooter yesterday has the intention of not coming out alive, having armed resistance probably isn't going to change their mind. Then there are always the people that say something like "if we banned all guns, this sort of thing wouldn't happen"... Again, a complete pipe dream. This circles back to the discussion earlier about not being able to find a middle ground. You have massive chunks of the population that believe the solution to this problem is something that is 150% unrealistic. It's almost like we can't even have the discussion because most have already made up their minds regardless of how impossible their fix is.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 07:45:27 AM
I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Not that I've seen.

The only thing I've seen Clinton support as far as 'gun control' that I think is retarded is the fact she thinks gun manufacturers should be able to be sued for gun violence. That's just dumb.

She's mentioned she'd support the buy back and confiscation programs that Australia, Britan and other European countries have implemented. But IMO that leads to "well...they did this, and so will we but we will ADD this and that"....and so on because that's what our government does. It adds sh%t just to add Sh%t. My largest complaint with either of them is that they want to enact more legislation when if we just enforced the laws that are already in place it'd be better than it is.

- The background checks are already ran through the FBI. What else can you do? If there's no record of you being bat shit crazy or anything else then you're not gonna red flag anywhere.

- Automatic weapons are already banned so what's left? The silly "military style" weapon argument? Because a .223 caliber rifle is dressed up like an AR-15 and looks scary we should ban it when my .223 Remington that performs the exact same way is fine, just because it 'looks' like a normal rifle. Yet, there is still a push to 'ban' from her and Obama and many other Dems.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 02, 2016, 07:51:13 AM
I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Not that I've seen.

The only thing I've seen Clinton support as far as 'gun control' that I think is retarded is the fact she thinks gun manufacturers should be able to be sued for gun violence. That's just dumb.


Yeah. That one drives me nuts. If I take a bat and smash a kid's head in on the playground, should the family be able to sue Easton?


Quote
The background checks are already ran through the FBI. What else can you do? If there's no record of you being bat shit crazy or anything else then you're not gonna red flag anywhere.

Only thing I'll say to this, and I'm not sure how I feel about it, is that I believe anything said in meetings with psychiatrists/psychologists is still confidential. If you've never done something, you won't be on the FBI's database, but there could still be a doctor somewhere that, given their experience, would highly advise a patient to not be allowed a firearm. I read a while back about legislation calling for doctors to be contacted in regards to patients who are applying for gun licenses. Like I said, I'm not sure how I feel about it. It would satisfy an important/needed mental health element, but at the same time there are privacy and constitutional rights issues.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 07:55:20 AM

Quote
The background checks are already ran through the FBI. What else can you do? If there's no record of you being bat shit crazy or anything else then you're not gonna red flag anywhere.

Only thing I'll say to this, and I'm not sure how I feel about it, is that I believe anything said in meetings with psychiatrists/psychologists are still confidential. If you've never done something, you won't be on the FBI's database, but there could still be a doctor somewhere that, given their experience, would highly advise a patient to not be allowed a firearm. I read a while back about legislation calling for doctors to be contacted in regards to patients who are applying for gun licenses. Like I said, I'm not sure how I feel about it. It would satisfy an important/needed mental health element, but at the same time there are privacy issues.

I do think this needs to be addressed. I totally get the confidentiality of the patient, but didn't the Colorado Movie theater shooter tell his therapist he was going to shoot a bunch of people? I know not every crazy person is going to tell someone but I think if a professional is told something like this then their duty and obligation then lies with protecting society at large first, and at the same time it'd be helping the person who's admitted they're going to shoot people.

This has to be an area where there could be some improvements. And, the other area is educating family. The Sandy Hook mom is a prime example. She knew her kid was not well but I'm sure out of pride, and fear she didn't say a word and look what happened. Educating families on what to look for should be a priority as well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 02, 2016, 07:56:52 AM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).

Adami, you're a very smart person with a very cogent point of view but I would suggest that perhaps you're defining "mental health" far too narrowly.  It's not just raving lunatics (not a scientific term) that a) commit these acts, or b) could benefit from mental health programs.   I am - I believe - perfectly sane, no suicidal or homicidal (except for my ex-wife) thoughts whatsoever, and with no major psychological traumas in my life (relatively speaking) and yet I see a therapist weekly without fail.   And even I have issues in terms of channeling harmful emotions in a way that aren't harmful to those around me (I don't mean shooting them, I mean in terms of anger-type responses). 

I don't disagree that there isn't a silver bullet here (pun intended).  It's likely a multi-pronged approach; but taking the guns away - as if these are recalcitrant kids who should be deprived of TV before dinner - is an overly simplistic, and not well-though out or researched approach.   

I still maintain the people that commit these heinous acts are secular versions of the people that flew those planes into the World Trade Center/Pentagon.  It's the same (or similar) mental mindset. 

I guess I'm doing a poor job articulating myself because that's also not what I'm saying. I'm a therapist, of course I think people could benefit from therapy. I am literally only saying that not everyone who commits these crimes is mentally unstable. That's it. Not arguing gun rights and definitely not suggesting mental health services wouldn't benefit the general public.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 02, 2016, 08:19:38 AM
I know the rhetoric is that Obama and Hillary want zero guns left in America, but have either of them actually done anything to support that point of view?
Not that I've seen.

The only thing I've seen Clinton support as far as 'gun control' that I think is retarded is the fact she thinks gun manufacturers should be able to be sued for gun violence. That's just dumb.

She's mentioned she'd support the buy back and confiscation programs that Australia, Britan and other European countries have implemented. But IMO that leads to "well...they did this, and so will we but we will ADD this and that"....and so on because that's what our government does. It adds sh%t just to add Sh%t. My largest complaint with either of them is that they want to enact more legislation when if we just enforced the laws that are already in place it'd be better than it is.

- The background checks are already ran through the FBI. What else can you do? If there's no record of you being bat shit crazy or anything else then you're not gonna red flag anywhere.

- Automatic weapons are already banned so what's left? The silly "military style" weapon argument? Because a .223 caliber rifle is dressed up like an AR-15 and looks scary we should ban it when my .223 Remington that performs the exact same way is fine, just because it 'looks' like a normal rifle. Yet, there is still a push to 'ban' from her and Obama and many other Dems.
The liability thing and the scary guns part are both pretty silly. I doubt the gun buy-back program makes much of a difference, but I don't think it hurts. Where it has been a problem is when gun-nuts standing across the street buy all of the guns for 10% more than the government was offering for them and then doing God knows what with them. And it's worth pointing out that the gun-nuts that buy them can then resell them without performing background checks.

Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

One thing I will throw out is that if Joker-dude told his therapist he was going to off some people, I'm pretty sure the law would have compelled her to drop a dime on him. Doctor patient confidentiality isn't what it used to be, and has (Adami can correct me if I'm wrong) never included people who are fixing to run amok are start diddling kiddos. What I could see is a sort of anonymous reporting system in place, but I don't really like the idea of being told that I can't buy a gun because of something I'm not allowed to know about. There's also the possibility that maybe my therapist is a pacifist and DQs all of her patients from gun ownership just out of principle.

Anyhoo, the point to all of this is that of the two sides, you've got the NRA standing as far over as they can get, opposed to even the most benign check on ownership, and you've got the left offering up specific proposals, which while of dubious efficacy, are still pretty narrowly tailored and a far cry from "no guns for anybody," which seems to be what the NRA crowd is so afraid of. One's a whole lot closer to the center than the other.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 08:30:11 AM
Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

The private sale of guns is a major area that needs to be addressed. Heck, the Sig Sauer P238 that I own and use as my primary carry weapon would still pop up as being owned by my brother. He's the original owner but sold it to me. We made a bill of sale and if ever needed it would track back to me eventually but the first search in any data base it'd be his name. I could sell that gun to someone, they to someone and so on and it'd always pop up as my brothers name as the owner in any data base. That's a big problem along with the fact that there is NO BACKGROUND check if I decide to sell my gun to EB or anyone else. Just an exchange of $$.

There has to be a better way of executing private gun sales with a background check in place. Make it a law all private gun sales have to be brokered at a licensed dealer or something.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 02, 2016, 08:50:48 AM
Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

The private sale of guns is a major area that needs to be addressed. Heck, the Sig Sauer P238 that I own and use as my primary carry weapon would still pop up as being owned by my brother. He's the original owner but sold it to me. We made a bill of sale and if ever needed it would track back to me eventually but the first search in any data base it'd be his name. I could sell that gun to someone, they to someone and so on and it'd always pop up as my brothers name as the owner in any data base. That's a big problem along with the fact that there is NO BACKGROUND check if I decide to sell my gun to EB or anyone else. Just an exchange of $$.

There has to be a better way of executing private gun sales with a background check in place. Make it a law all private gun sales have to be brokered at a licensed dealer or something.
Yeah, I think this would be a step forward.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 02, 2016, 09:04:42 AM
Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

The private sale of guns is a major area that needs to be addressed. Heck, the Sig Sauer P238 that I own and use as my primary carry weapon would still pop up as being owned by my brother. He's the original owner but sold it to me. We made a bill of sale and if ever needed it would track back to me eventually but the first search in any data base it'd be his name. I could sell that gun to someone, they to someone and so on and it'd always pop up as my brothers name as the owner in any data base. That's a big problem along with the fact that there is NO BACKGROUND check if I decide to sell my gun to EB or anyone else. Just an exchange of $$.

There has to be a better way of executing private gun sales with a background check in place. Make it a law all private gun sales have to be brokered at a licensed dealer or something.
Yeah, that'd be the same as the standard FFL for purchasing guns online. It's sort of a pain in the ass, and it requires you to give money to a middle man (exactly the sort of thing that pisses people off), but I suppose it'd be a workable option. One thing I did notice when I bought my gun was that the FFL fee can vary wildly between gun shops. It could be $15 one place and $65 right next door. Always thought that was a bit odd.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 09:53:24 AM
Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

The private sale of guns is a major area that needs to be addressed. Heck, the Sig Sauer P238 that I own and use as my primary carry weapon would still pop up as being owned by my brother. He's the original owner but sold it to me. We made a bill of sale and if ever needed it would track back to me eventually but the first search in any data base it'd be his name. I could sell that gun to someone, they to someone and so on and it'd always pop up as my brothers name as the owner in any data base. That's a big problem along with the fact that there is NO BACKGROUND check if I decide to sell my gun to EB or anyone else. Just an exchange of $$.

There has to be a better way of executing private gun sales with a background check in place. Make it a law all private gun sales have to be brokered at a licensed dealer or something.
Yeah, that'd be the same as the standard FFL for purchasing guns online. It's sort of a pain in the ass, and it requires you to give money to a middle man (exactly the sort of thing that pisses people off), but I suppose it'd be a workable option. One thing I did notice when I bought my gun was that the FFL fee can vary wildly between gun shops. It could be $15 one place and $65 right next door. Always thought that was a bit odd.

Without knowing anything about it I'd venture a guess that there is no standard or regulation as far as what the cost should be and its left up to whatever the business wants to charge. Another area for standardization that would help stop people from fleecing folks.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 02, 2016, 12:08:50 PM
They probably do sometimes. I can't argue that. I'm sure there are cases throughout history of it happening. However, this isn't a reason to create stricter gun laws. The real issue is the mental state of those who are able to purchase guns. I'm leaving work so I can't get into this and say everything I want to say, but I'll pick this up later.

I didn't say anything about gun control. Just pointing that "mental health" isn't the catch-all people seem to think it is. I say this as someone in the field of mental health. There's a cultural problem at work as well (among the basic problem that some people just end up killing other people and can't be stopped until it's too late).

Adami, you're a very smart person with a very cogent point of view but I would suggest that perhaps you're defining "mental health" far too narrowly.  It's not just raving lunatics (not a scientific term) that a) commit these acts, or b) could benefit from mental health programs.   I am - I believe - perfectly sane, no suicidal or homicidal (except for my ex-wife) thoughts whatsoever, and with no major psychological traumas in my life (relatively speaking) and yet I see a therapist weekly without fail.   And even I have issues in terms of channeling harmful emotions in a way that aren't harmful to those around me (I don't mean shooting them, I mean in terms of anger-type responses). 

I don't disagree that there isn't a silver bullet here (pun intended).  It's likely a multi-pronged approach; but taking the guns away - as if these are recalcitrant kids who should be deprived of TV before dinner - is an overly simplistic, and not well-though out or researched approach.   

I still maintain the people that commit these heinous acts are secular versions of the people that flew those planes into the World Trade Center/Pentagon.  It's the same (or similar) mental mindset. 

I guess I'm doing a poor job articulating myself because that's also not what I'm saying. I'm a therapist, of course I think people could benefit from therapy. I am literally only saying that not everyone who commits these crimes is mentally unstable. That's it. Not arguing gun rights and definitely not suggesting mental health services wouldn't benefit the general public.

I think I get what Stadler is saying, and I agree with him. Mental instability could account for a large group of people, not just the types of people who would carry out school shootings. Since you are a therapist, wouldn't you say someone who perpetrate these shootings has some issues? I don't recall there ever being school shootings or serial killers or anything of that extreme nature performed by someone who is mentally stable.

Why did I bring up gun rights? Because these shootings always lead the absent-minded idea that we need stricter gun laws to prevent these events from happening. As if criminals would suddenly lose the ability to attain illegal weapons.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: vtgrad on June 02, 2016, 12:16:09 PM
I'd vote for all of you guys... this is the most sensible conversation regarding this topic I've seen.  Other than the earlier conversations in this thread of course.

Shame that the processes that may actually help to change the issues that need changing are dominated by representatives who either willfully or blindly adhere to any path that is NOT the common-ground path.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 02, 2016, 12:30:16 PM

Quote
The background checks are already ran through the FBI. What else can you do? If there's no record of you being bat shit crazy or anything else then you're not gonna red flag anywhere.

Only thing I'll say to this, and I'm not sure how I feel about it, is that I believe anything said in meetings with psychiatrists/psychologists are still confidential. If you've never done something, you won't be on the FBI's database, but there could still be a doctor somewhere that, given their experience, would highly advise a patient to not be allowed a firearm. I read a while back about legislation calling for doctors to be contacted in regards to patients who are applying for gun licenses. Like I said, I'm not sure how I feel about it. It would satisfy an important/needed mental health element, but at the same time there are privacy issues.

I do think this needs to be addressed. I totally get the confidentiality of the patient, but didn't the Colorado Movie theater shooter tell his therapist he was going to shoot a bunch of people? I know not every crazy person is going to tell someone but I think if a professional is told something like this then their duty and obligation then lies with protecting society at large first, and at the same time it'd be helping the person who's admitted they're going to shoot people.

Well, yes, there are strong patient/therapist confidentiality rights on the part of the patient.  And those are there for a reason.  But therapists are also mandatory reporters for certain kinds of things, such as what you mention.  But it gets really tricky in terms of how to balance the two.  It isn't a perfect system, but that is because you simply cannot create a set of rules that take into account every single situation.

Where it has been a problem is when gun-nuts standing across the street buy all of the guns for 10% more than the government was offering for them and then doing God knows what with them. And it's worth pointing out that the gun-nuts that buy them can then resell them without performing background checks.

Background checks really need to be dealt with. There needs to be some accountability with private transactions, which is a tricky thing to do. I don't think my dad should have to run a background check on me before giving me his guns, for example. Yet I shouldn't be able to sell those guns to strangers via craigslist, either. Moreover, those background checks really are somewhat halfassed.

Interesting.  Here in Cali, you can't re-sell without registering the re-sale.  And the penalties for not doing so are pretty stiff.  So that kind of thing is addressed here.  And while our state laws and local ordinances have gone TOO far in many respects, this is one area where our approach makes sense to me.  If we are going to require registration, there is no reason not to require it for resales. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 01:11:38 PM
Interesting.  Here in Cali, you can't re-sell without registering the re-sale.  And the penalties for not doing so are pretty stiff. 

Really? I could walk outside and sell my gun to the next person I see if I wanted to. You are supposed to create a bill of sale stating when you sold it, how much, who to in case if the gun is ever used in a crime, the original owner can prove he/she sold it and they'd just follow it down the line of sale(s).

It's a pretty foolish thing and I'd be completely in support of having to register the sale or have the sale brokered by a licensed dealer....just to get the background checks involved.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 02, 2016, 02:26:50 PM
Yeah, in Tejas the only obligation is to make a "reasonable effort" to insure that the buyer is 18+, not hammered, and not planning on doing something naughty with his new gun. And guns in Texas aren't registered at all, so there's no problem there (from a paperwork standpoint, that is).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 02, 2016, 02:34:25 PM
make a "reasonable effort"

"Do you have the money?"

"Yes"

"Cool...here you go....careful, it's loaded"
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 02, 2016, 03:45:40 PM
make a "reasonable effort"

"Do you have the money?"

"Yes"

"Cool...here you go....careful, it's loaded"
For liability's sake, I think you're supposed to ask "you're a law-abiding citizen, riggghhhttt?" while nodding suggestively.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 02, 2016, 03:52:20 PM
:lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 03, 2016, 06:55:17 AM
:texas:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 03, 2016, 09:16:49 AM
Interesting.  Here in Cali, you can't re-sell without registering the re-sale.  And the penalties for not doing so are pretty stiff. 

Really? I could walk outside and sell my gun to the next person I see if I wanted to. You are supposed to create a bill of sale stating when you sold it, how much, who to in case if the gun is ever used in a crime, the original owner can prove he/she sold it and they'd just follow it down the line of sale(s).

It's a pretty foolish thing and I'd be completely in support of having to register the sale or have the sale brokered by a licensed dealer....just to get the background checks involved.

That's funny; the guy who bought my gun is named "Ted Nugent" too!   
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 03, 2016, 09:50:41 AM
Interesting.  Here in Cali, you can't re-sell without registering the re-sale.  And the penalties for not doing so are pretty stiff. 

Really? I could walk outside and sell my gun to the next person I see if I wanted to. You are supposed to create a bill of sale stating when you sold it, how much, who to in case if the gun is ever used in a crime, the original owner can prove he/she sold it and they'd just follow it down the line of sale(s).

It's a pretty foolish thing and I'd be completely in support of having to register the sale or have the sale brokered by a licensed dealer....just to get the background checks involved.

That's funny; the guy who bought my gun is named "Ted Nugent" too!
I bought mine under the name John Cocktosten.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 03, 2016, 10:18:29 AM
Gotta confess, I got one using the name Don Corleone.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 03, 2016, 06:55:19 PM
I got the one using F. Fletch. I'm a shepherd.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 04, 2016, 08:25:09 AM
 :rollin
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Ben_Jamin on June 05, 2016, 12:58:57 PM

I know America is a bit different, but it does go to show that people can be easily driven to do those things by ideas, beliefs or emotions and can be mentally stable.

Right on, some examples of this being Donald Trump, or just reaching that breaking point.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 05, 2016, 04:27:28 PM
The big difference is if you are at your breaking point, violence  and killing should not be the first step or the last step.  We all know it is very wrong yet many go right there.

I find it disturbing that one's ideology leads to murder and violence first. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 08:08:09 AM
Should only be a matter of hours before they start calling for all sorts of 'bans' on assault weapons.....which is already in place.....due to the Orlando shooting.

Interested to find out more about the shooter.....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: ZKX-2099 on June 12, 2016, 08:40:50 AM
It's weird. All guns were banned in that club, yet there was still a shooting...

Really makes you think.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 12, 2016, 09:11:57 AM
It's weird. All guns were banned in that club, yet there was still a shooting...

Really makes you think.

Well, yes. I mean, if guns were banned, how could it ever happen that guns were used there? That's just impossible because guns were banned so guns should stop existing there.  ::)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Ben_Jamin on June 12, 2016, 09:43:20 AM
It's weird. All guns were banned in that club, yet there was still a shooting...

Really makes you think.

Well, yes. I mean, if guns were banned, how could it ever happen that guns were used there? That's just impossible because guns were banned so guns should stop existing there.  ::)

Basically, they didn't do a search. Which would be the smart and wise thing to do if you really want no guns. Unless the suspect just ran in guns a blazing.

But why a nightclub?

Should only be a matter of hours before they start calling for all sorts of 'bans' on assault weapons.....which is already in place.....due to the Orlando shooting.

Interested to find out more about the shooter.....

I'm anticipating what they're gonna say now. First because of the voice winner, and now this. Will we see more of these being reported as we get closer to election?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 09:47:32 AM
I'm on my phone so I'm having trouble linking articles but the gunman has been identified as middle eastern descent and the FBI has confirmed they have strong suspicion he is affiliated and sympathizes with Muslim extremist groups

What a surprise. Can't wait to see how hard the media bends over backwards to call this every bring but a terrorist attack.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: orcus116 on June 12, 2016, 09:48:58 AM
The public outrage will last a week until the next flavor of the week news story comes out. Timing seems impeccable since the Brock Turner outrage has sort of petered out.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Scorpion on June 12, 2016, 10:24:58 AM
I'm on my phone so I'm having trouble linking articles but the gunman has been identified as middle eastern descent and the FBI has confirmed they have strong suspicion he is affiliated and sympathizes with Muslim extremist groups

What a surprise. Can't wait to see how hard the media bends over backwards to call this every bring but a terrorist attack.

It has already been called a terrorist attack, so I'm not quite sure what your point is.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 10:34:13 AM
I'm on my phone so I'm having trouble linking articles but the gunman has been identified as middle eastern descent and the FBI has confirmed they have strong suspicion he is affiliated and sympathizes with Muslim extremist groups

What a surprise. Can't wait to see how hard the media bends over backwards to call this every bring but a terrorist attack.

It has already been called a terrorist attack, so I'm not quite sure what your point is.

My point will become more clear as the reporting continues this week. It'll focus more on the weapon used raher than the terrorist and his affiliations.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 10:39:22 AM
Dude, over 50 people are dead and the only response you have is a snarky pre-attack against the anti-gun people? Not even going to show a little sympathy? How is this any better than the people you're so vehemently railing against right now?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on June 12, 2016, 10:45:27 AM
I'm surprised no one here has brought up the LGBT connections. The guy shot up a gay bar/club over pride weekend, and news outlets are trying to connect the shooter with Muslim extremists. Weird.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 10:53:21 AM
Dude, over 50 people are dead and the only response you have is a snarky pre-attack against the anti-gun people? Not even going to show a little sympathy? How is this any better than the people you're so vehemently railing against right now?

How do you know how I've responded? I know full well if I would dictate the prayer my wife and I said this morning immediately after hearing this news it'd be attacked along the lines of "oh, prayers and thoughts"' the usual BS.

Don't assume those people haven't been in my thoughts just because I haven't mentioned them here. The 'debatable' issue isn't it every one of us aren't heartbroken for the families and close friends of the victims. Knowing the people on the forum I'm sure we all are because it's tragic.

The debatable issue will be the typical 'Clinton' types who will lambast the NRA and guns and 'Trump' folk who will lambast the terrorists and Islam.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 10:56:01 AM
Dude, over 50 people are dead and the only response you have is a snarky pre-attack against the anti-gun people? Not even going to show a little sympathy? How is this any better than the people you're so vehemently railing against right now?

How do you know how I've responded? I know full well if I would dictate the prayer my wife and I said this morning immediately after hearing this news it'd be attacked along the lines of "oh, prayers and thoughts"' the usual BS.

Don't assume those people haven't been in my thoughts just because I haven't mentioned them here. The 'debatable' issue isn't it every one of us aren't heartbroken for the families and close friends of the victims. Knowing the people on the forum I'm sure we all are because it's tragic.

The debatable issue will be the typical 'Clinton' types who will lambast the NRA and guns and 'Trump' folk who will lambast the terrorists and Islam.

I'm just talking about on this forum. Your first response here was to attack the anti-gun people. I mean, do what you want. I just figured we would focus on the tragedy before attacking our political rivals.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 12, 2016, 10:56:09 AM
Dude, over 50 people are dead and the only response you have is a snarky pre-attack against the anti-gun people? Not even going to show a little sympathy? How is this any better than the people you're so vehemently railing against right now?

This is a discussion forum and a thread about shootings, I don't think anyone needs to specifically say they are sorry for the victims and families before talking about the point of the thread.

I at least would hope that is assumed.

Anyway, so fucked up.  It weird cause I woke up to a facebook alert on my phone saying a person I know was "safe from the shooting" and I was like WTF does that mean?  And yea I guess he was in Orlando or something and checked into facebook that he was not involved in the shooting, but still such an odd way of life that we are living in.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 11:00:03 AM
I guess I just feel weird when the first written response is a snarky attack on political rivals.

I don't know. I'll just back out. Sorry for interrupting.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lonestar on June 12, 2016, 11:06:31 AM
I just want to fucking vomit. So tired of this shit, and even more tired of the unbelievably predictable back and forth lame ass banter that accomplishes absolute dick. People can bash the gun argument and immigration argument all they want, and it will make for great television and Internet fodder, but it won't bring back 50 sons and daughters, and it won't prevent the next inevitable shooting.

My faith in humanity thinks it will get better, but unfortunately humanity is comprised of humans, and we're fucking lame at best.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Ben_Jamin on June 12, 2016, 11:31:14 AM
And now Obama is going to speak. I wonder what he's going to say.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 11:40:35 AM
And now Obama is going to speak. I wonder what he's going to say.

I bet it won't be that the gunman called 911 right before his attack and swore allegiance to ISIS and Thier leader. But I'd bet bottom dollar guns are attacked.

As with the conversations here when this happens.....it'll be the same old same old....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 12, 2016, 11:59:35 AM
Honestly, Gary, anti-Moslem trumps anti-gun every time.  I'm more bothered by all of the wacky legislation they'll rush back to DC to pass than I am the anti-gun bickering. "If only we could have accessed his phone earlier this whole thing could have been prevented!!!"  "We couldn't monitor his facebook page without a warrant and that's why they died!" We'll get saddled with the REMEMBERORLANDO Act, which strips away a few more rights and protections. Trump will use this as a selling point for why we must elect him, which many will buy, despite the fact that the terrorists know that his rhetoric will help them far more than his policies will hurt them. I'll see a few more crying eagle decals on the backs of trucks. Life will go on.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 03:17:11 PM
I bet it won't be that the gunman called 911 right before his attack and swore allegiance to ISIS and Thier leader. But I'd bet bottom dollar guns are attacked.

I'll admit I was surprised at how candid obama was that this was a terrorist attack. I'm guessing he has access to a bit more info. than we do at the moment and knew without a doubt that it was or I don't think he'd have acknowledged it that quickly.

He did mention the 'same old' tag line of how easy it is for Americans to buy guns....and so forth. And that remains the rub. Automatic weapons are banned, magazine capacity has been limited. The only other thing to do is modify the purchasing/background check process in a manner that (I guess) could have identified people like this guy as a problem? What does that entail?

You're not going to find me saying that nothing needs to be done because it's clear it does but you will see me say it has nothing to do with the weaponry or 'taking' it away....because folks like this will get the weaponry they want one way or the other.

But the background check/purchasing of the guns has to be addressed. I just don't know where the right place to start is? Apparently this guy was 'on the radar' of the FBI according to what's being reported. Why was he then allowed to purchase guns?

 If we are using the FBI as the data base for our info. to grant purchases then why wouldn't this guys 'on the radar' status be used against him...he obviously did something to get on the radar.


It's no secret I tend to side on the 'gun rights' side but I'm not an idiot either. There HAS to be a middle ground between "take all the guns away" and "you ain't touchin' nun of my guns'
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: orcus116 on June 12, 2016, 03:21:40 PM
Apparently this guy was 'on the radar' of the FBI according to what's being reported. Why was he then allowed to purchase guns?

 If we are using the FBI as the data base for our info. to grant purchases then why wouldn't this guys 'on the radar' status be used against him...he obviously did something to get on the radar.

That's what I'm hearing as well and if true it's quite troubling.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Scorpion on June 12, 2016, 03:38:15 PM
I guess that depends on what one has to do to get onto the radar of the FBI, though, doesn't it? I haven't yet read anywhere what being on the FBI's radar actually means and what one has to do to end up there.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 03:59:39 PM
I guess that depends on what one has to do to get onto the radar of the FBI, though, doesn't it? I haven't yet read anywhere what being on the FBI's radar actually means and what one has to do to end up there.

exactly, why was this dude on their "radar" and what do we do to get on it? Could me getting ticked off and posting a 9 paragraph post about the government get me on it? What is this "radar"?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 12, 2016, 04:18:30 PM



It's no secret I tend to side on the 'gun rights' side but I'm not an idiot either. There HAS to be a middle ground between "take all the guns away" and "you ain't touchin' nun of my guns'

Agreed, and this is where the NRA is the biggest problem. They seemingly object to any legislation that would restrict anyone's ability to buy a firearm, and always by screaming about the 2nd amendment.  Another problem are those hardcore liberals who want to act like new gun laws would magically make gun crime disappear.

I think most Americans, even ones who are more pro-gun than anti-gun (whatever it means to be either), would be in favor of major changes, but the power of the NRA is tough to shake.  And it's not like such changes would prevent most of the large scale shooting we see happen, but they still seem like common sense changes that are long overdue.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: pogoowner on June 12, 2016, 05:52:41 PM
I think most Americans, even ones who are more pro-gun than anti-gun (whatever it means to be either), would be in favor of major changes, but the power of the NRA is tough to shake.  And it's not like such changes would prevent most of the large scale shooting we see happen, but they still seem like common sense changes that are long overdue.
For some reason, many seem to hold the view that because legislation wouldn't succeed in stopping every single act of gun violence, there should be no new legislation at all. Which is silly.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 06:05:12 PM
I think most Americans, even ones who are more pro-gun than anti-gun (whatever it means to be either), would be in favor of major changes, but the power of the NRA is tough to shake.  And it's not like such changes would prevent most of the large scale shooting we see happen, but they still seem like common sense changes that are long overdue.
For some reason, many seem to hold the view that because legislation wouldn't succeed in stopping every single act of gun violence, there should be no new legislation at all. Which is silly.

My opposition to more gun legislation (pertaining to the actual guns) is that we already have prudent legislation in place. No automatic weapons and limited magazine capacity are already in place.

Any new legislation should focus on the background check process and identifying mentally unstable folk who are seeking guns.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 06:10:26 PM
Did this dude legally obtain his guns?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 06:15:38 PM
Did this dude legally obtain his guns?
[/quote

They are saying he did. Which is concerning being that the FBI had him "on their radar" and had interviewed him twice about being affiliated with ISIS or other terrorist organizations yet the FBI provides the background checks on all firearm purchases.

How did they not red flag this guy and deny his purchase with their apparent concern about him?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 06:17:14 PM
Did this dude legally obtain his guns?

They are saying he did. Which is concerning being that the FBI had him "on their radar" and had interviewed him twice about being affiliated with ISIS or other terrorist organizations yet the FBI provides the background checks on all firearm purchases.

How did they not red flag this guy and deny his purchase with their apparent concern about him?

Oh I dunno. Maybe they just didn't have much evidence of anything? It'd be pretty silly to jump to any conclusions with so few facts.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 12, 2016, 06:21:26 PM
Did this dude legally obtain his guns?

They are saying he did. Which is concerning being that the FBI had him "on their radar" and had interviewed him twice about being affiliated with ISIS or other terrorist organizations yet the FBI provides the background checks on all firearm purchases.

How did they not red flag this guy and deny his purchase with their apparent concern about him?

Oh I dunno. Maybe they just didn't have much evidence of anything? It'd be pretty silly to jump to any conclusions with so few facts.

If anything they could have notified local authorities that a man they've been watching a while just purchased two guns?

To me this is a failure of the system and it wouldn't matter how many laws you put in place if we can't even red flag a guy whose been "on the radar" of the FBI to the tune of being interviewed twice.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 12, 2016, 06:27:06 PM
Did this dude legally obtain his guns?

They are saying he did. Which is concerning being that the FBI had him "on their radar" and had interviewed him twice about being affiliated with ISIS or other terrorist organizations yet the FBI provides the background checks on all firearm purchases.

How did they not red flag this guy and deny his purchase with their apparent concern about him?

Oh I dunno. Maybe they just didn't have much evidence of anything? It'd be pretty silly to jump to any conclusions with so few facts.

If anything they could have notified local authorities that a man they've been watching a while just purchased two guns?

To me this is a failure of the system and it wouldn't matter how many laws you put in place if we can't even red flag a guy whose been "on the radar" of the FBI to the tune of being interviewed twice.

I agree with the 2nd part of this. I think it's super easy to look back with hindsight and say "obviously they could have done XYZ", but I have no idea what actually went wrong, none of us do. But you're right, no new gun laws would fix much of this. There isn't a fix all. There isn't an action we can take. These things will happen. It's where we are as a species.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: TL on June 12, 2016, 07:57:58 PM
So 50+ people just died, and some people in this thread, as their first reaction, decided to be preemptively snarky about gun control.

This is a level of inhumanity I literally can't fucking stomach. I hope you people are some day able to have a bit of introspection. I am never coming to this section of the forum again. It is just so depressingly pointless.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: orcus116 on June 12, 2016, 08:06:18 PM
It may be a little bit of desensitization and I hope I'm not offending anyone but when I heard the news my first (and current) thought was "damn that sucks but what am I supposed to do?". It's absolutely a terrible thing that people lost their lives but I can honestly say that it really doesn't affect me on a personal level.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Cool Chris on June 12, 2016, 08:35:41 PM
I feel the same way, Orcus. it affects a lot of people, if you factor in the family and friends of 50 dead people, and the community as a whole. But at the end of the day, it happened, it is terrible, I am glad I was not affected by it, and at the same time, I can't get emotionally wrapped up in it.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 12, 2016, 08:52:17 PM
It may be a little bit of desensitization and I hope I'm not offending anyone but when I heard the news my first (and current) thought was "damn that sucks but what am I supposed to do?". It's absolutely a terrible thing that people lost their lives but I can honestly say that it really doesn't affect me on a personal level.

I feel the same way, Orcus. it affects a lot of people, if you factor in the family and friends of 50 dead people, and the community as a whole. But at the end of the day, it happened, it is terrible, I am glad I was not affected by it, and at the same time, I can't get emotionally wrapped up in it.



I have to side in both your corners. It's not that I don't care and I am not heartless, but it's a matter of rationality. How many single deaths do we not hear about on a daily basis? Why should one deserve our attention more than another? Is it more worthy of mentioning because it was a mass shooting? Should we mourn for all of them? Fuck, if we were to express the same emotions for everyone that died we'd be in a constant state of lamentation.

I'm especially not going to get behind that "this is why guns are bad" bullshit. The media stuffs this stuff down our throat so that we have no other choice to take notice of it. I wonder why we never heard of the tens of thousands of lives that have been saved because of guns.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: j on June 12, 2016, 09:01:52 PM
So 50+ people just died, and some people in this thread, as their first reaction, decided to be preemptively snarky about gun control.

This is a level of inhumanity I literally can't fucking stomach. I hope you people are some day able to have a bit of introspection. I am never coming to this section of the forum again. It is just so depressingly pointless.

Wtf?  Are you sure they didn't have a sympathetic thought before typing up something to post on here?  Do we all need to submit a mandatory "I'm so sorry for the losses of all X number of families and friends of the victims of this terrible, terrible tragedy befalling our fellow countrymen, you are all in my thoughts and prayers" and then wait 30 minutes before resuming discussion (inane though it may be at times)?

I think it's assumed that we all consider this a horrible thing and feel badly for the families and loved ones of the victims.  Or at least I'd hope we could give each other the benefit of the doubt.

-J
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 13, 2016, 05:49:21 AM
I can't shake thinking about this event. That could be in part due to the fact it's all the internet is talking about. It's hard to avoid bringing up guns when you see something like this happen. This sack of shit murdered FIFTY people, and I'm sure more will die who are in the hospital with injuries. Fifty. This isn't a debate about how someone got a hold of weapon and killed a few people. This is so beyond that it's sickening. You think any kind of gun law is going to stop a person like this from mass killing? Someone has a brain so warped they can kill fifty strangers, and you think gun laws are going to stop them? Even if we some how managed to make every single firearm in this country disappear prior to this event, it would have been a pipe bomb or a pressure cooker in the middle of that dance floor (If not a weapon smuggled in).

We just had someone pledge alegence to ISIS and kill 50 Americans, and we're worried about gun legislation? ISIS has officially set foot on American soil, and our president still can't say the words "radical Islam"? I've supported Obama on a lot of things, and I credit him with a lot of good, but this is ridiculous. How are we ever going to approach this issue seriously if our leaders refuse to acknowledge that this is a direct result of one religion's beliefs clashing with our western society?

Unreal.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 13, 2016, 07:06:44 AM
I can't shake thinking about this event. That could be in part due to the fact it's all the internet is talking about. It's hard to avoid bringing up guns when you see something like this happen. This sack of shit murdered FIFTY people, and I'm sure more will die who are in the hospital with injuries. Fifty. This isn't a debate about how someone got a hold of weapon and killed a few people. This is so beyond that it's sickening. You think any kind of gun law is going to stop a person like this from mass killing? Someone has a brain so warped they can kill fifty strangers, and you think gun laws are going to stop them? Even if we some how managed to make every single firearm in this country disappear prior to this event, it would have been a pipe bomb or a pressure cooker in the middle of that dance floor (If not a weapon smuggled in).

We just had someone pledge alegence to ISIS and kill 50 Americans, and we're worried about gun legislation? ISIS has officially set foot on American soil, and our president still can't say the words "radical Islam"? I've supported Obama on a lot of things, and I credit him with a lot of good, but this is ridiculous. How are we ever going to approach this issue seriously if our leaders refuse to acknowledge that this is a direct result of one religion's beliefs clashing with our western society?

Unreal.

This. I also found it interesting that of the initial tweets put out by the 3 presidential nominees only Bernie mentioned tougher gun control laws.

The talk should be about radical Islam and preventing terrorism and not gun control. This guy had multiple leagle permits and legally purchased fire arms. The guy had been inestigated twice by the FBI and he still sipped through the cracks. I agree that the background check process needs to be improved but if this asshole slipped through the cracks it will always happen. My prime example against stricter gun laws in general is Chicago. Chicago has some of the most strict gun laws in the country and 60 people were shot over Memorial Day weekend. That's 60 people shot, not killed, but shot in 3 days. But we never hear about that.

And lets all be honest. Part of the reason why this guy slipped through the cracks is because of the PC culture we have created. There is speculation that he wasn't fired from his job because he was Muslim and his employer didn't want to look like they were being discriminatory. I get that not every Muslim person is evil and could turn out to be a terrorist. But this is the second attack by ISIS (inspired) terrorists on American Soil this year. Something has to be done and if it means more strict observation of a select group of people to protect the masses in our country than so be it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 13, 2016, 08:15:07 AM
I can't shake thinking about this event. That could be in part due to the fact it's all the internet is talking about. It's hard to avoid bringing up guns when you see something like this happen. This sack of shit murdered FIFTY people, and I'm sure more will die who are in the hospital with injuries. Fifty. This isn't a debate about how someone got a hold of weapon and killed a few people. This is so beyond that it's sickening. You think any kind of gun law is going to stop a person like this from mass killing? Someone has a brain so warped they can kill fifty strangers, and you think gun laws are going to stop them? Even if we some how managed to make every single firearm in this country disappear prior to this event, it would have been a pipe bomb or a pressure cooker in the middle of that dance floor (If not a weapon smuggled in).

We just had someone pledge alegence to ISIS and kill 50 Americans, and we're worried about gun legislation? ISIS has officially set foot on American soil, and our president still can't say the words "radical Islam"? I've supported Obama on a lot of things, and I credit him with a lot of good, but this is ridiculous. How are we ever going to approach this issue seriously if our leaders refuse to acknowledge that this is a direct result of one religion's beliefs clashing with our western society?

Unreal.

This. I also found it interesting that of the initial tweets put out by the 3 presidential nominees only Bernie mentioned tougher gun control laws.

The talk should be about radical Islam and preventing terrorism and not gun control. This guy had multiple leagle permits and legally purchased fire arms. The guy had been inestigated twice by the FBI and he still sipped through the cracks. I agree that the background check process needs to be improved but if this asshole slipped through the cracks it will always happen. My prime example against stricter gun laws in general is Chicago. Chicago has some of the most strict gun laws in the country and 60 people were shot over Memorial Day weekend. That's 60 people shot, not killed, but shot in 3 days. But we never hear about that.

And lets all be honest. Part of the reason why this guy slipped through the cracks is because of the PC culture we have created. There is speculation that he wasn't fired from his job because he was Muslim and his employer didn't want to look like they were being discriminatory. I get that not every Muslim person is evil and could turn out to be a terrorist. But this is the second attack by ISIS (inspired) terrorists on American Soil this year. Something has to be done and if it means more strict observation of a select group of people to protect the masses in our country than so be it.

All of these.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lonestar on June 13, 2016, 10:09:20 AM

Something has to be done and if it means more strict observation of a select group of people to protect the masses in our country than so be it.

That's a very dangerous road to travel, and history has told us it never ends well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 13, 2016, 10:19:39 AM
^this.  What if it's decided that YOU are a part of that select group of people.  Not so okay then, is it?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 13, 2016, 10:26:57 AM
^this.  What if it's decided that YOU are a part of that select group of people.  Not so okay then, is it?
Well, just speaking in the abstract, if I belong to a certain group where a segment of that group has shown a propensity, a concerted will and desire, and an established pattern of trying to do harm to others, I think at the end of the day I have to simply face reality and own the fact that that segment exists and that I, by virtue of my membership in the group as a whole, resemble those others who are trying to do harm.  Yeah, it should rightly be pointed out that "not all of 'us' are like that--those guys are a fringe group."  But still, the unfortunate reality is that more harm can likely be prevented by keeping a closer eye on that group as whole.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 13, 2016, 10:28:18 AM
If you are on the radar for violent radical postings or threaten someone at work like this guy did maybe you should be on the radar though.  You and I won't be.  The'll find beer bottles, empty ice cream cartons and regret.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 13, 2016, 10:32:42 AM
If you are on the radar for violent radical postings or threaten someone at work like this guy did maybe you should be on the radar though.  You and I won't be.  The'll find beer bottles, empty ice cream cartons and regret.
:lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 13, 2016, 10:45:29 AM

Something has to be done and if it means more strict observation of a select group of people to protect the masses in our country than so be it.

That's a very dangerous road to travel, and history has told us it never ends well.

We've opened investigations into churches of scientology, and have gone after otherwise closed Amish communities in order to protect children from abuse. If we got wind that a particular church's alter boys getting fucked between masses, you can guarantee we'd have federal officials in there immediately. I don't understand why muslims and mosques should be exempt.

I'm not saying every muslim should be added to a watch list by default, but I definitely think we are not looking into people of interest because of fear of public outcry.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 13, 2016, 10:48:40 AM
My opposition to more gun legislation (pertaining to the actual guns) is that we already have prudent legislation in place. No automatic weapons and limited magazine capacity are already in place.
Not in Florida.  No restriction on magazine size.

If someone wants to kill someone else, they will do it.  No one can stop that.  But the number of people killed and wounded in this incident is due in part to the kind of weapon used (no, it's not automatic, but it will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger) and the large magazine capacity (he could get off a shitload of rounds before having to change his clip).

Like it or not, that's a fact.  And that is something that could and should be addressed.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 13, 2016, 10:57:39 AM
the number of people killed and wounded in this incident is due in part to the kind of weapon used (no, it's not automatic, but it will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger) and the large magazine capacity (he could get off a shitload of rounds before having to change his clip).

Like it or not, that's a fact.  And that is something that could and should be addressed.

Exactly.  By its very nature, it allows one to efficiently kill as many people as possible in a very short amount of time, out of reach of a person's ability to even attempt to defend themselves.  At least if someone comes at you with a knife, for example, you have better options to defend yourself.  People constantly go on about how cars and knives and Nickelback are way more deadly than guns, but I can't remember the last time I heard about a mass machete hacking.  Why?  Because it isn't as efficient a killing machine.  Mass shooter incidents?  Damn near weekly.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 13, 2016, 11:07:57 AM
Okay, but even if we take that as a granted, let's look at other comparable scenarios to see the flaws in that logic.  Since the '90s, once-rampant death by Nickleback have declined drastically.  But that isn't the result of anti-Nickleback legislation whatsoever.  There is only so much the law can do to cure such deep societal ills.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 13, 2016, 11:27:54 AM
My anti-Nickelback rhetoric knows no bounds.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 13, 2016, 11:30:06 AM
^this.  What if it's decided that YOU are a part of that select group of people.  Not so okay then, is it?
Well, just speaking in the abstract, if I belong to a certain group where a segment of that group has shown a propensity, a concerted will and desire, and an established pattern of trying to do harm to others, I think at the end of the day I have to simply face reality and own the fact that that segment exists and that I, by virtue of my membership in the group as a whole, resemble those others who are trying to do harm.  Yeah, it should rightly be pointed out that "not all of 'us' are like that--those guys are a fringe group."  But still, the unfortunate reality is that more harm can likely be prevented by keeping a closer eye on that group as whole.
Are you referring to Christians or lawyers?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 13, 2016, 11:33:36 AM
Either.  I was being intentionally vague and over-inclusive. 

...and, yes, I see what you did there. ;)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 13, 2016, 11:46:57 AM
^this.  What if it's decided that YOU are a part of that select group of people.  Not so okay then, is it?
Well, just speaking in the abstract, if I belong to a certain group where a segment of that group has shown a propensity, a concerted will and desire, and an established pattern of trying to do harm to others, I think at the end of the day I have to simply face reality and own the fact that that segment exists and that I, by virtue of my membership in the group as a whole, resemble those others who are trying to do harm.  Yeah, it should rightly be pointed out that "not all of 'us' are like that--those guys are a fringe group."  But still, the unfortunate reality is that more harm can likely be prevented by keeping a closer eye on that group as whole.
Are you referring to Christians or lawyers?

(https://static4.fjcdn.com/comments/Ouch+_f059a1587ddd4e49ed97d9ab7bd25423.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 13, 2016, 11:56:49 AM
Agreed, and this is where the NRA is the biggest problem. They seemingly object to any legislation that would restrict anyone's ability to buy a firearm, and always by screaming about the 2nd amendment.  Another problem are those hardcore liberals who want to act like new gun laws would magically make gun crime disappear.

I think most Americans, even ones who are more pro-gun than anti-gun (whatever it means to be either), would be in favor of major changes, but the power of the NRA is tough to shake.  And it's not like such changes would prevent most of the large scale shooting we see happen, but they still seem like common sense changes that are long overdue.

I'm not "pro-gun" and have little sympathy for the NRA, but for me, you've said it all.  Why in God's name would we do something if we know it won't work?  You're restricting rights here, and even if you don't value them, the law says you can only curtail "fundamental rights" in the least restrictive way possible.  It's just not tenable to curtail right because it "sounds good".    Would you restrict Ozzy, or Frank Zappa or any of a number of controversial artists because, well, stopping their lyrics won't change anything but it "sounds good"?   Of course not. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 13, 2016, 12:06:53 PM
My opposition to more gun legislation (pertaining to the actual guns) is that we already have prudent legislation in place. No automatic weapons and limited magazine capacity are already in place.
Not in Florida.  No restriction on magazine size.

If someone wants to kill someone else, they will do it.  No one can stop that.  But the number of people killed and wounded in this incident is due in part to the kind of weapon used (no, it's not automatic, but it will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger) and the large magazine capacity (he could get off a shitload of rounds before having to change his clip).

Like it or not, that's a fact.  And that is something that could and should be addressed.

Why do I bristle with this "logic"?   So we're saying that 14 deaths are okay, but fifty aren't?  Because by putting the false bandage on that it is all about "magazine size" you're basically ensuring that they either carry multiple weapons with them, or we continue to have these mini-massacres unabated until they don't even register on the news anymore.

Why not get to the root of this?  What it is that allows this human to knowingly and with aforethought take ANY lives, let alone 14 or 50?   

I get it, we don't want to scan Muslim phones, we don't want to ban 1.6 million people or whatever it is, but can't we at least change "on our radar" to be grounds to limit gun purchases? If not, what IS the criteria?   Previous mass assaults?   

Think about this logic:  if we agree that it is too egregious to deny ONE PERSON, who is known to the FBI, the purchase of a gun, why are we even CONSIDERING a ban, which would effectively deny ALL people that same gun?  The FBI doesn't know me from a row of assholes*, so how can they - as doppleganger for the government - deny me a gun?

(Well, they only know me as "Shavedbeaver1965"). 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 13, 2016, 12:19:14 PM
Agreed, and this is where the NRA is the biggest problem. They seemingly object to any legislation that would restrict anyone's ability to buy a firearm, and always by screaming about the 2nd amendment.  Another problem are those hardcore liberals who want to act like new gun laws would magically make gun crime disappear.

I think most Americans, even ones who are more pro-gun than anti-gun (whatever it means to be either), would be in favor of major changes, but the power of the NRA is tough to shake.  And it's not like such changes would prevent most of the large scale shooting we see happen, but they still seem like common sense changes that are long overdue.

I'm not "pro-gun" and have little sympathy for the NRA, but for me, you've said it all.  Why in God's name would we do something if we know it won't work?

For feel good delusions and votes?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 13, 2016, 12:23:42 PM
I get it, we don't want to scan Muslim phones, we don't want to ban 1.6 million people or whatever it is, but can't we at least change "on our radar" to be grounds to limit gun purchases? If not, what IS the criteria?   Previous mass assaults?   

Nah, according to the NRA's GOP lackeys that would keep good Americans who are wrongly placed on watchlists from buying their guns.

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-blocks-bill-stop-terrorists-buying-guns (https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-blocks-bill-stop-terrorists-buying-guns)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 13, 2016, 12:29:46 PM
My opposition to more gun legislation (pertaining to the actual guns) is that we already have prudent legislation in place. No automatic weapons and limited magazine capacity are already in place.
Not in Florida.  No restriction on magazine size.

If someone wants to kill someone else, they will do it.  No one can stop that.  But the number of people killed and wounded in this incident is due in part to the kind of weapon used (no, it's not automatic, but it will fire as quickly as you can pull the trigger) and the large magazine capacity (he could get off a shitload of rounds before having to change his clip).

Like it or not, that's a fact.  And that is something that could and should be addressed.

Why do I bristle with this "logic"?   So we're saying that 14 deaths are okay, but fifty aren't?  Because by putting the false bandage on that it is all about "magazine size" you're basically ensuring that they either carry multiple weapons with them, or we continue to have these mini-massacres unabated until they don't even register on the news anymore.

Why not get to the root of this?  What it is that allows this human to knowingly and with aforethought take ANY lives, let alone 14 or 50?   

I get it, we don't want to scan Muslim phones, we don't want to ban 1.6 million people or whatever it is, but can't we at least change "on our radar" to be grounds to limit gun purchases? If not, what IS the criteria?   Previous mass assaults?   

Think about this logic:  if we agree that it is too egregious to deny ONE PERSON, who is known to the FBI, the purchase of a gun, why are we even CONSIDERING a ban, which would effectively deny ALL people that same gun?  The FBI doesn't know me from a row of assholes*, so how can they - as doppleganger for the government - deny me a gun?
No one is considering a ban (at least, no one with the actual power to implement a ban).

I was just correcting Gary who said that magazine limitations are already in place.  They aren't everywhere.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 13, 2016, 01:13:01 PM
So apparently a white non-Muslim from Indiana was planning a huge attack on the LGBT pride in LA but was stopped.

......should we start removing freedoms from dudes from Indiana?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 13, 2016, 01:25:37 PM
So apparently a white non-Muslim from Indiana was planning a huge attack on the LGBT pride in LA but was stopped.

......should we start removing freedoms from dudes from Indiana?

It's not about religion or skin color.  It's about extremist like the guy you are talking about. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 13, 2016, 01:27:38 PM
So apparently a white non-Muslim from Indiana was planning a huge attack on the LGBT pride in LA but was stopped.

......should we start removing freedoms from dudes from Indiana?

It's not about religion or skin color.  It's about extremist like the guy you are talking about.

Oh I know, that was more directed at the people who said they support being more suspicious or watchful of Muslims.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 13, 2016, 02:13:47 PM
Yup.  Plenty of scumbags for all.  It saddens me.  I'd rather drink a beer any get some insight on others.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on June 13, 2016, 05:44:28 PM
https://www.facebook.com/ajplusenglish/videos/744058605735649/
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 14, 2016, 11:34:34 AM
That's cute and all (and ironic; an "oversimplified" argument discussed on Facebook*), but it's not a little disingenuous.   

Doesn't that mindset lend credibility where none exists?   <Godwin's Law Alert> Do we really sit and listen to Hitler, to understand where he's coming from?  Do we suppose that we would do the same in the same situation? More close to home, when we were "oppressed" by Britain, did we engage in the death of innocent Brits on Trafalger Square?  Did we drop the Tower of London as a statement against our oppression?  Not hardly.

I'm not suggesting anything radical, but I strongly believe the time for any kind of reasoned negotiation has passed.

(* The Monday after the event the most trending topic?  Meg Ryan's face at the Tony Awards).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 14, 2016, 11:50:02 AM
Anyway.

So it's starting to look like the shooter was possibly closeted and acted mostly out of rage for that, likely just aligning with the likes of ISIS out of convenience.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 14, 2016, 12:00:25 PM
Also coming out: His wife was entirely aware of what he was planning to do and drove him to various locations to "scope them out".
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 14, 2016, 12:01:10 PM
Anyway.

So it's starting to look like the shooter was possibly closeted and acted mostly out of rage for that, likely just aligning with the likes of ISIS out of convenience.

Yea, just read this guy was a somewhat regular at that bar and even asked guys out in the past, plus his ex wife says he is gay. 

https://www.facebook.com/ajplusenglish/videos/744058605735649/

Don't you think we listened to ISIS enough?  Not saying there isn't validity to some of the other things this lady had to say (listening should have been done a long time ago and we should continue to listen to the actual people/law abiding citizens of these countries), but to think we aren't listening to the terrorists is enough for me to not find much of what else she says to be credible or worthwhile.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 14, 2016, 12:09:24 PM
Anyway.

So it's starting to look like the shooter was possibly closeted and acted mostly out of rage for that, likely just aligning with the likes of ISIS out of convenience.

Sounds just like the profile for any other mass murderer, including any other terrorist since they're one and the same. Confused, aimless, socially awkward and angry as hell for all the same reasons. Grasping for anything to provide meaning and easily corruptible.
   
 None of this will matter, though. In the end it's easier, more expedient and more satisfying to just dump him into the terrorist bin and leave it at that.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 14, 2016, 12:21:06 PM
dump him into the terrorist bin and leave it at that.

Well....that's what he was. Along with the suggestion he might have been gay it's also being revealed that he was reading the sermons and watching the videos of the Muslim Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki....same Cleric the San Bernardino terrorists and Boston Bombing terrorists were worshiping.

Whether or not he was a closeted gay dude really isn't important. The fact that he's another disciple of this Muslim Cleric who does nothing but preach the destruction of America is way more important. Why the mosque the Cleric spouts this crap at hasn't been leveled by a couple tons of smart bombs when he and his followers are in it is beyond me....
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 14, 2016, 12:26:36 PM
Anyway.

So it's starting to look like the shooter was possibly closeted and acted mostly out of rage for that, likely just aligning with the likes of ISIS out of convenience.

Sounds just like the profile for any other mass murderer, including any other terrorist since they're one and the same. Confused, aimless, socially awkward and angry as hell for all the same reasons. Grasping for anything to provide meaning and easily corruptible.


That kind of ambivalence will drive a person mad.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 14, 2016, 12:37:38 PM
The fact that this guy was laughing and smiling while murding all of those people tells me he enjoyed doing what he did. If we was really gay who cares. Then he's just a gay terrorist who murdered 49 of his peers. I think too many people are trying to ignore the religious impact of his actions and just attribute his actions to being unable to cope with is homosexual feelings.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 14, 2016, 12:38:55 PM
dump him into the terrorist bin and leave it at that.

Well....that's what he was. Along with the suggestion he might have been gay it's also being revealed that he was reading the sermons and watching the videos of the Muslim Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki....same Cleric the San Bernardino terrorists and Boston Bombing terrorists were worshiping.

Whether or not he was a closeted gay dude really isn't important. The fact that he's another disciple of this Muslim Cleric who does nothing but preach the destruction of America is way more important. Why the mosque the Cleric spouts this crap at hasn't been leveled by a couple tons of smart bombs when he and his followers are in it is beyond me....
Well, first off, they blew him to bits 5 years ago. Second, the reason you don't blow his mosque up back while he was doing it is simple. The right for him to do exactly what he was doing is perhaps the most fundamental right that we as Americans respect (or at least claim to)*. Third, another crucial right that we claim to respect is that you don't get blown to bits without being afforded due process of law. That makes our execution of the guy a criminal act, IMO.

*It intrigues me that so many people fawn all over soldiers who defend our values, yet they'd just as soon see our values scrapped than face the risk of living with them.

And yes, this asshole was a terrorist in the American sense of the word. My point wasn't to suggest that he wasn't, but rather to say that most people don't want to consider anything beyond the most simple label. The consequence of that is failing to understand that he's absolutely no different than that Aurora theater dickhead or Dillon and Klebold. They're the exact same asshole.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 14, 2016, 12:42:51 PM
The fact that this guy was laughing and smiling while murding all of those people tells me he enjoyed doing what he did. If we was really gay who cares. Then he's just a gay terrorist who murdered 49 of his peers. I think too many people are trying to ignore the religious impact of his actions and just attribute his actions to being unable to cope with is homosexual feelings.

Why can't it be a mixture of a few things?  I got to think his inner struggle of being gay is a huge reason for him to kill gay people, as well as his religious beliefs and probably having a mind that could be guided by his inner struggles to become a terrorist by the people who want to see gays/americans dead.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 14, 2016, 12:43:31 PM
he's absolutely no different than that Aurora theater dickhead or Dillon and Klebold. They're the exact same asshole.

I think we disagree here. I think him being a Radicalized Islamist separates him from the mentally deranged that you mentioned.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 14, 2016, 12:56:27 PM
To me, religion can be a crutch for those lost in their life.  Now it's their twisting of the beliefs that turns them and it becomes their radical views.

Religion isn't bad, these interpretations from unbalanced people is the root of all evil.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 14, 2016, 12:57:58 PM
he's absolutely no different than that Aurora theater dickhead or Dillon and Klebold. They're the exact same asshole.

I think we disagree here. I think him being a Radicalized Islamist separates him from the mentally deranged that you mentioned.
They're all emotionally bankrupt and looking for some capital. They find it in a cause that involves killing people they resent. The same cause leads them to their ends, even if the outcomes are facially different.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Cable on June 14, 2016, 02:59:28 PM
At the end of the day, I'm pessimistic and left with if there is a will, there is a way. If guns are restricted, there will be a black market dealer somewhere. If those are somehow controlled, then homemade explosives or someone who knows how. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 14, 2016, 03:04:28 PM
if there is a will, there is a way.

I totally believe this.  That's why, for me, the problem isn't the way, it's the will.  Why do people want to create such violent acts?  It's not an easy question to answer, but I dont think the reason people do these things is because guns are legal or because we have religious freedom, I think it's rooted much deeper in the mind of humans in general and a psychological issue that I truly do not understand.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lonestar on June 14, 2016, 06:30:59 PM
While I agree with the whole "will there's a way" ideal, I feel it's no reason to be complacent on action.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 14, 2016, 06:32:55 PM
While I agree with the whole "will there's a way" ideal, I feel it's no reason to be complacent on action.
Indeed. The problem is that many have a hard time distinguishing between deliberation and complacency.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: mikeyd23 on June 15, 2016, 07:07:28 AM
While I agree with the whole "will there's a way" ideal, I feel it's no reason to be complacent on action.

Agreed. But the difficult thing is knowing what action to take. My wife and I were discussing the Orlando shooting last night and I told her I honestly have no clue how you prevent something like that from happening. People will cry for gun control, but that's an attempt (and a dangerous one at that) to try to eliminate a potential tool a person may use to impose their "will". It doesn't begin to solve the root problem, which is that "will". That being said I have no clue how to take actionable steps forward to try to lessen the likelihood of this happening in the future...
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 07:12:56 AM
dump him into the terrorist bin and leave it at that.

Well....that's what he was. Along with the suggestion he might have been gay it's also being revealed that he was reading the sermons and watching the videos of the Muslim Cleric Anwar al-Awlaki....same Cleric the San Bernardino terrorists and Boston Bombing terrorists were worshiping.

Whether or not he was a closeted gay dude really isn't important. The fact that he's another disciple of this Muslim Cleric who does nothing but preach the destruction of America is way more important. Why the mosque the Cleric spouts this crap at hasn't been leveled by a couple tons of smart bombs when he and his followers are in it is beyond me....
Well, first off, they blew him to bits 5 years ago. Second, the reason you don't blow his mosque up back while he was doing it is simple. The right for him to do exactly what he was doing is perhaps the most fundamental right that we as Americans respect (or at least claim to)*. Third, another crucial right that we claim to respect is that you don't get blown to bits without being afforded due process of law. That makes our execution of the guy a criminal act, IMO.

*It intrigues me that so many people fawn all over soldiers who defend our values, yet they'd just as soon see our values scrapped than face the risk of living with them.

And yes, this asshole was a terrorist in the American sense of the word. My point wasn't to suggest that he wasn't, but rather to say that most people don't want to consider anything beyond the most simple label. The consequence of that is failing to understand that he's absolutely no different than that Aurora theater dickhead or Dillon and Klebold. They're the exact same asshole.
Yep.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 15, 2016, 07:24:43 AM
I don't think there is much you can do. I'm not for the banning of the AR-15. There a huge amount of these weapons owned by good citizens and the percentage of people who use them to murder people is minute. That being said, I'm all for making it harder to obtain one. I think the background check process needs to be overhauled. It still won't prevent people from using guns to harm innocents. Any thing can be made into a weapon of war. And what is a weapon of war? Something that is used to kill someone? How many people are killed by drunk driver daily? Why not ban cars or booze? Obviously that wouldn't happen but it's the same premise. There have to be ways to prevent the killing of innocents. Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car? I'm sure people would bitch about it being an invasion of privacy but I'm all for giving up some privacy to ensure the saftery of myself and my family.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 07:55:39 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lonestar on June 15, 2016, 07:59:19 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.

Having heard more than the average person's share of DUI horror stories, I agree completely. I would love to hear arguments for the counter.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 15, 2016, 08:14:32 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.

Having heard more than the average person's share of DUI horror stories, I agree completely. I would love to hear arguments for the counter.


*I am not condoning drunk driving*

1) It's a forced, unnecessary expense to a lot of people. Someone who doesn't drink shouldn't under any circumstance have to pay for such a device in their car. That'd be like me being forced to buy a gun safe, even if I'm not a gun owner, just to close on a house.
2) What's to stop a sober person from blowing into it initially? I couldn't tell you how many times when I was young I got into the driver seat sober and was six beers deep by the time I reached my destination. Would it require a driver to blow once every half hour incase they are getting drunk while driving?
3) One more expensive thing to replace if it fails.
4) It opens the floodgates for any other type of monitoring in the name of safety.

If we're getting into the business of forcing people to buy additional hardware in the name of safety, there other things that would be more beneficial (and cheaper) than mandatory breathalyzers. Why not monitor a car's position via GPS and regulate the the car's maximum speed depending on their location? Why not have a facial recognition camera pointed at the driver that recognizes who's driving and disables everything but the emergency features on their phone? Why not allow police to send you tickets based on the data you send to Waze or Google? The government could mandate that by the year 2030, every car needs to be 100% autonomous and make it illegal for humans to operate them themselves. That way, all the roads would be safe.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 15, 2016, 08:32:56 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.
The first time it broke and left you stranded seven miles from home on a sweltering Summer day you'd have your answer. Not only is it an expense that normal people shouldn't have to deal with, but it's an added complication. One with the potential to be expensive and harmful. Interlocks, regardless of their goal, are bad.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 15, 2016, 09:33:29 AM
While I agree with the whole "will there's a way" ideal, I feel it's no reason to be complacent on action.
Indeed. The problem is that many have a hard time distinguishing between deliberation and complacency.

And it depends, of course, on the action.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 15, 2016, 09:45:26 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.

Because "innocent until proven guilty". 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Ben_Jamin on June 15, 2016, 09:47:54 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.
The first time it broke and left you stranded seven miles from home on a sweltering Summer day you'd have your answer. Not only is it an expense that normal people shouldn't have to deal with, but it's an added complication. One with the potential to be expensive and harmful. Interlocks, regardless of their goal, are bad.

Shit, I'm from New Mexico and we have a bad DWI problem. They've tried so hard to fight but are badly failing. They've made "tougher,harsher" penalties for being caught, like having an interlock installed for a year. The irony is the microbreweries began popping up our of nowhere, and they seem to not have a problem hosting random festivals like "bacon and brew fest".

If they really wanted to combat DWI, they'd have done just that and installed interlocks. But, it is true. It's a hassle and I can let you know they are more of a distraction driving, more so than texting. What if I pass out from trying to blow into that thing?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 10:11:35 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.

Because "innocent until proven guilty".
I don't think that would have anything to do with a safety feature.  It's not about innocence or guilt from a legal perspective, just safe operation of a vehicle. 

Some of the other objections seem a little like cop-outs to me, with all due respect. 

One more system that could go wrong, in a modern car, that already has 787 systems that could go wrong, most of which most people don't even know or care about?  So what?

Added expense?  If it became a mandatory car part, like an emergency brake or fuel gauge, the cost would be mitigated.  It would be just another part, you wouldn't notice the cost.

I don't know, I just don't get it.

Of course, I also don't understand how, for most of my lifetime, the maximum speed limit most places was 70 mph, but it was perfectly legal to buy vehicles that could achieve three times that speed, so maybe I'm just not meant to understand.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 15, 2016, 10:36:03 AM
Why hasn't the government mandated a device be placed in every car requires that a persons BAC be checked prior to starting a car?
I have actually wondered about this for years.

The technology is available, because many people who have already been convicted of DWI have to have it installed in their cars.  I have no idea why it isn't standard issue on all cars.  Seems like a way to cut down the death rate immensely.

Because "innocent until proven guilty".
I don't think that would have anything to do with a safety feature.  It's not about innocence or guilt from a legal perspective, just safe operation of a vehicle. 

Some of the other objections seem a little like cop-outs to me, with all due respect. 

One more system that could go wrong, in a modern car, that already has 787 systems that could go wrong, most of which most people don't even know or care about?  So what?

Added expense?  If it became a mandatory car part, like an emergency brake or fuel gauge, the cost would be mitigated.  It would be just another part, you wouldn't notice the cost.

I don't know, I just don't get it.

Of course, I also don't understand how, for most of my lifetime, the maximum speed limit most places was 70 mph, but it was perfectly legal to buy vehicles that could achieve three times that speed, so maybe I'm just not meant to understand.
We evaluate things for cost/benefit all the time. You mentioned speed limits and that's a fine place to start. We could institute a 25MPH speed limit, rigidly enforce it and fine people $500 for every mile per hour they exceed it and save 35,000 lives per year. We don't do it because it'd be fucking stupid. Thirty five thousand lives per year is what we're perfectly willing to spend for the convenience of getting somewhere faster. The 55MPH national highway speed limit saved 3-5k lives per year. Eh, 75 is better than 55, presumably to the tune of 3500 lives per year. The interlock you're suggesting is making everybody jump through hoops to save the 10k* killed in alcohol related accidents. Good, rational people might well think that's a fine trade off, and others might not. In the end it's a valuation we make and as I've hopefully pointed out it's not exactly a clear-cut one.

By the way, I don't know if you read my story in the car thread, but I had an Audi A6 crap out on me because an anti-theft interlock failed. Dealer wanted $2800 to replace the entire steering column, and there were no other options because it required reprogramming from the mothership in Germany. The more complications you add the greater the likelihood of failure, and the more $pecialized the repair becomes.


*Technically nobody has a clue how many people die in alcohol related accidents because the people that track them look for every possible link they can find, whether meaningful or not. That's one of the things that'd be best resolved before we start counting beans.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 11:21:23 AM
We evaluate things for cost/benefit all the time. You mentioned speed limits and that's a fine place to start. We could institute a 25MPH speed limit, rigidly enforce it and fine people $500 for every mile per hour they exceed it and save 35,000 lives per year. We don't do it because it'd be fucking stupid. Thirty five thousand lives per year is what we're perfectly willing to spend for the convenience of getting somewhere faster. The 55MPH national highway speed limit saved 3-5k lives per year. Eh, 75 is better than 55, presumably to the tune of 3500 lives per year. The interlock you're suggesting is making everybody jump through hoops to save the 10k* killed in alcohol related accidents. Good, rational people might well think that's a fine trade off, and others might not. In the end it's a valuation we make and as I've hopefully pointed out it's not exactly a clear-cut one.
That's fine, but I wasn't debating what the correct speed limit should be, which is where your cost/benefit analysis comes into play.  I'm saying that in a society that determines that speed limits are important, and that those speed limits are different in different locations, and that there should be consequences and repercussions for exceeding those speeds, it is questionable to even physically be able to exceed those speeds to the tune of 3x.

By the way, I don't know if you read my story in the car thread, but I had an Audi A6 crap out on me because an anti-theft interlock failed. Dealer wanted $2800 to replace the entire steering column, and there were no other options because it required reprogramming from the mothership in Germany. The more complications you add the greater the likelihood of failure, and the more $pecialized the repair becomes.
That sucks.  But surely part of the reason for that high cost is that it was a particular option on a particular foreign car.  If it were just a mandatory part on all new automobiles (which is what I have in mind, not forcing current auto owners to buy it and have it attached to their current cars), then the cost and hassle involved would be quite a bit less.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 15, 2016, 11:38:37 AM
We evaluate things for cost/benefit all the time. You mentioned speed limits and that's a fine place to start. We could institute a 25MPH speed limit, rigidly enforce it and fine people $500 for every mile per hour they exceed it and save 35,000 lives per year. We don't do it because it'd be fucking stupid. Thirty five thousand lives per year is what we're perfectly willing to spend for the convenience of getting somewhere faster. The 55MPH national highway speed limit saved 3-5k lives per year. Eh, 75 is better than 55, presumably to the tune of 3500 lives per year. The interlock you're suggesting is making everybody jump through hoops to save the 10k* killed in alcohol related accidents. Good, rational people might well think that's a fine trade off, and others might not. In the end it's a valuation we make and as I've hopefully pointed out it's not exactly a clear-cut one.
That's fine, but I wasn't debating what the correct speed limit should be, which is where your cost/benefit analysis comes into play.  I'm saying that in a society that determines that speed limits are important, and that those speed limits are different in different locations, and that there should be consequences and repercussions for exceeding those speeds, it is questionable to even physically be able to exceed those speeds to the tune of 3x.

By the way, I don't know if you read my story in the car thread, but I had an Audi A6 crap out on me because an anti-theft interlock failed. Dealer wanted $2800 to replace the entire steering column, and there were no other options because it required reprogramming from the mothership in Germany. The more complications you add the greater the likelihood of failure, and the more $pecialized the repair becomes.
That sucks.  But surely part of the reason for that high cost is that it was a particular option on a particular foreign car.  If it were just a mandatory part on all new automobiles (which is what I have in mind, not forcing current auto owners to buy it and have it attached to their current cars), then the cost and hassle involved would be quite a bit less.
The existence of speed limits is just as much a cost/benefit matter as the specifics of those speed limits. Same with the hassle of having to blow into a tube just to prove that you're not drunk.  As a rule we try not to make the citizenry jump through hoops, and whether or not it's reasonable depends on the amount of hassle for the benefit gained.

Also, every cat built in the last 15 years has an anti-theft interlock. If your key has an RFID tag in it then you're at the mercy of the RFID reader that failed in my car. The cost was so high because non-dealers aren't allowed to or capable of reprogramming new chips. It would have been no different if it were a Ford. Aside from that RFID scanner, there are a variety of other switches that tie into it to prevent starting if something's not right. A switch in the brake pedal. A switch in the PRNDL. Now we'd be throwing in a switch on the breathalyzer. Each of these is capable of failing and bricking your car.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Lucien on June 15, 2016, 11:50:50 AM
Reminds me of the time we were stuck in a hotel for a week when we were only supposed to be there for a day because the van decided our key was bad for whatever reason
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 15, 2016, 11:57:28 AM
Just to put things in persepective. According to the CDC close to 30 people per day are killed due to alchohol related car accidents. Thats 210 per week or close to 11,000 people who die due to drunk driving. 11,000 dead. Throw in the sexual assaults and other violence that is caused by alchohol and then add up the monetary cost (property, medical, court, etc.) and your looking at billions of dollars per year.

I don't want to derail the thread or discount the effect of gun violence but I'm still amazed that gun control is such a hot topic when alchohol continues to be glorified in society yet it is one of the most toxic substances around. You can't turn on a sporting event with out being blasted by beer comercials. And now colleges are starting to sell alchohol at football games. For some reason, we seem to be going the wrong direction. I also wanted to point out that a lot of the arguments against have BAC checker in every car are the same arguments used by legal and responsible gun owners who are also good productive citizens. I also think that most good citizens would be willing to put up with some irritation to ensure the safety of their loved ones.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 12:05:54 PM
*shrugs*
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 15, 2016, 12:17:59 PM
Just to put things in persepective. According to the CDC close to 30 people per day are killed due to alchohol related car accidents. Thats 210 per week or close to 11,000 people who die due to drunk driving. 11,000 dead. Throw in the sexual assaults and other violence that is caused by alchohol and then add up the monetary cost (property, medical, court, etc.) and your looking at billions of dollars per year.

I don't want to derail the thread or discount the effect of gun violence but I'm still amazed that gun control is such a hot topic when alchohol continues to be glorified in society yet it is one of the most toxic substances around. You can't turn on a sporting event with out being blasted by beer comercials. And now colleges are starting to sell alchohol at football games. For some reason, we seem to be going the wrong direction. I also wanted to point out that a lot of the arguments against have BAC checker in every car are the same arguments used by legal and responsible gun owners who are also good productive citizens. I also think that most good citizens would be willing to put up with some irritation to ensure the safety of their loved ones.
Strange Deja Vous.

And all good citizens would be willing to put up with irritation if they could ensure their loved one's safety. Nobody's safety can be ensured, however. The question becomes how much irritation for how much of an improvement in the odds. Right now tons of people would gladly pay an extra $5/pop cover charge for added security at night clubs to prevent another incident. It'd be a terrible investment, of course. They'd be slightly better served by banning Jack Russell from performing, and greatly better off by prohibiting pyrotechnics altogether, both of which cost nothing.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 15, 2016, 12:51:39 PM
Just to put things in persepective. According to the CDC close to 30 people per day are killed due to alchohol related car accidents. Thats 210 per week or close to 11,000 people who die due to drunk driving. 11,000 dead. Throw in the sexual assaults and other violence that is caused by alchohol and then add up the monetary cost (property, medical, court, etc.) and your looking at billions of dollars per year.

I don't want to derail the thread or discount the effect of gun violence but I'm still amazed that gun control is such a hot topic when alchohol continues to be glorified in society yet it is one of the most toxic substances around. You can't turn on a sporting event with out being blasted by beer comercials. And now colleges are starting to sell alchohol at football games. For some reason, we seem to be going the wrong direction. I also wanted to point out that a lot of the arguments against have BAC checker in every car are the same arguments used by legal and responsible gun owners who are also good productive citizens. I also think that most good citizens would be willing to put up with some irritation to ensure the safety of their loved ones.

I've mentioned this before. People just don't like guns and whatever statistics you throw in their face won't matter. They'll always have an excuse. It's beyond reason at that point and it doesn't pay to waste your breath on them. Take pleasure in knowing that you think clearer and without bias.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 15, 2016, 12:52:20 PM
YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH ABOUT JACK RUSSELL!!
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 15, 2016, 12:59:05 PM
I've mentioned this before. People just don't like guns and whatever statistics you throw in their face won't matter. They'll always have an excuse. It's beyond reason at that point and it doesn't pay to waste your breath on them. Take pleasure in knowing that you think clearer and without bias.

I've encountered just as many pro-gun people that are equally pointless to try to have a reasonable conversation with on this subject, because even the slightest suggestion of any sort of actions to curb crazies getting guns is taken as some sort of backdoor into all-out gun confiscation from every American.  It goes both ways.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 15, 2016, 01:04:58 PM
I've mentioned this before. People just don't like guns and whatever statistics you throw in their face won't matter. They'll always have an excuse. It's beyond reason at that point and it doesn't pay to waste your breath on them. Take pleasure in knowing that you think clearer and without bias.

I've encountered just as many pro-gun people that are equally pointless to try to have a reasonable conversation with on this subject, because even the slightest suggestion of any sort of actions to curb crazies getting guns is taken as some sort of backdoor into all-out gun confiscation from every American.  It goes both ways.
Agreed.  As with many issues, the ability to made points reasonably and have a rationale discussion, no matter which side of the issue one falls on, is practiced by a minority.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 15, 2016, 01:17:08 PM

I don't disagree that there are people on both sides of the argument who need a smack in the head. However, people still ignore statistics because they are so set in their ways that nothing else matters. You're not going to convince me that guns kill more people than car accidents involving DUIs simply because it's not true. Are we going to ban cars OR do what it takes to curb those PEOPLE from causing further deaths? It's the same logic. The responsibility falls in the hand of the person. The sooner people realize that, the better chance we have of taking precautions to prevent the wrong people from getting guns.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 15, 2016, 01:21:57 PM

I don't disagree that there are people on both sides of the argument who need a smack in the head. However, people still ignore statistics because they are so set in their ways that nothing else matters. You're not going to convince me that guns kill more people than car accidents involving DUIs simply because it's not true. Are we going to ban cars OR do what it takes to curb those PEOPLE from causing further deaths? It's the same logic. The responsibility falls in the hand of the person. The sooner people realize that, the better chance we have of taking precautions to prevent the wrong people from getting guns.

Certainly true.  And I agree with the bulk of what you are saying.  But I also can understand those who can cogently argue that the stats are irrelevant and that an argument like your compares apples to oranges because, for example, cars are practically a necessity of life in modern society whereas guns are nowhere near that (ignoring, for argument's sake, the small minority of areas where they are a necessity to provide food, etc.).  I don't happen to agree with that argument, but it is a fair one.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 15, 2016, 02:00:12 PM

I don't disagree that there are people on both sides of the argument who need a smack in the head. However, people still ignore statistics because they are so set in their ways that nothing else matters. You're not going to convince me that guns kill more people than car accidents involving DUIs simply because it's not true. Are we going to ban cars OR do what it takes to curb those PEOPLE from causing further deaths? It's the same logic. The responsibility falls in the hand of the person. The sooner people realize that, the better chance we have of taking precautions to prevent the wrong people from getting guns.

Certainly true.  And I agree with the bulk of what you are saying.  But I also can understand those who can cogently argue that the stats are irrelevant and that an argument like your compares apples to oranges because, for example, cars are practically a necessity of life in modern society whereas guns are nowhere near that (ignoring, for argument's sake, the small minority of areas where they are a necessity to provide food, etc.).  I don't happen to agree with that argument, but it is a fair one.

While I definitely understand how comparing cars to guns might not have be a perfect analogy, the mentality of the people in both instances are what cause the problems. It's not really about the mediums for killing, which is basically my point. It's the people involved and what needs to be done.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 02:23:54 PM
But it is, in part, about the mediums for killing.

You can't change people (at least legislatively).  Assholes will always be assholes.  And murderous assholes will always be murderous assholes.  So there will, to a certain extent, especially in a "free" society like ours, always be murders, and occasionally mass murders.  No way around that.

But while you can't prevent death itself from happening, you can mitigate, to a certain extent, the numbers of deaths that occur during these events, such as limiting what weapons are available to the public, or the size of magazines that are available to purchase legally, or just not letting people on the no-fly list or suspected of terrorism purchase such weapons. 

To say that meaningful gun regulations are wrong to pursue just because you can't stop all gun deaths from occurring is akin to saying that automobile manufacturers should stop doing crash tests to try to learn ways to change production on their cars to mitigate numbers of deaths due to automobile accidents.  Of course there will always be accidents, and there will always be some deaths because of those accidents.  But SOME changes that can be taken will make SOME of those deaths not happen, or at least significantly reduce the chances of those deaths happening.  Comparing it to silly things like "banning cars" is unproductive.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 15, 2016, 02:39:44 PM
YOU SHUT YOUR WHORE MOUTH ABOUT JACK RUSSELL!!

HAHAHA.

With you on that.  Love that guy's voice for some reason.  LOVE IT. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 15, 2016, 02:48:15 PM
And when she's in the mood
When she needs that loving groove
When she wants it rude
She grooves with mista bone
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 15, 2016, 02:59:25 PM
This thread is now about Great White. Guns have been banned (from the discussion).
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 15, 2016, 03:20:09 PM
Guns have been banned (from the discussion).

...and replaced with katanas?  :caffeine:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 15, 2016, 03:32:22 PM
This thread is now about Great White. Guns have been banned (from the discussion).


(https://i583.photobucket.com/albums/ss272/kingshmegland/FB_IMG_1466026232956_zpsdcecmqdj.jpg) (https://s583.photobucket.com/user/kingshmegland/media/FB_IMG_1466026232956_zpsdcecmqdj.jpg.html)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 15, 2016, 07:44:24 PM
I think I told you guys, I played at the Station in Warwick, RI (the place that GW accidentally burned down) several times. One of my favorite places to play.

Stadler, I get what you mean about his voice. House of Broken Love is sooooooo f*cking awesome.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 16, 2016, 05:32:40 AM
But it is, in part, about the mediums for killing.

You can't change people (at least legislatively).  Assholes will always be assholes.  And murderous assholes will always be murderous assholes.  So there will, to a certain extent, especially in a "free" society like ours, always be murders, and occasionally mass murders.  No way around that.

But while you can't prevent death itself from happening, you can mitigate, to a certain extent, the numbers of deaths that occur during these events, such as limiting what weapons are available to the public, or the size of magazines that are available to purchase legally, or just not letting people on the no-fly list or suspected of terrorism purchase such weapons. 

To say that meaningful gun regulations are wrong to pursue just because you can't stop all gun deaths from occurring is akin to saying that automobile manufacturers should stop doing crash tests to try to learn ways to change production on their cars to mitigate numbers of deaths due to automobile accidents.  Of course there will always be accidents, and there will always be some deaths because of those accidents.  But SOME changes that can be taken will make SOME of those deaths not happen, or at least significantly reduce the chances of those deaths happening.  Comparing it to silly things like "banning cars" is unproductive.

I'm not arguing against there being a background check for purchasing a gun. That's something I have no problem with, depending on what the stipulations are of course. Some politician had suggested using the no-fly list. That would be a mistake. People have been put on the no-fly list for menial things. Something as simple as having a conspiracy theory blog has landed people there. I would hope the stipulations for purchasing a gun would involve a criminal history of sorts.

My argument is that blaming guns for mass shootings is short-sighted and not the root of the problem. You say that I'm comparing it to banning  cars but you're missing the point. Taking an inanimate object and assigning blame to it is more unproductive. The gun, the car, the knife, are useless without someone taking an incentive to give them power. When you use the weapon as the scapegoat, you're making excuses for people to behave how they want without repercussions. Maybe that's not your intention, but that's how it comes off. Forget the gun. Find out how someone like this was able to purchase a gun and remedy it.

As a matter of fact, I plan on purchasing one to keep in the house. There is no reason why we shouldn't be able to protect ourselves, our families, from criminals. I know the chances of a break-in in my neighborhood are slim to none, but I'd rather prepare for the worst.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 16, 2016, 06:15:08 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26402367
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 16, 2016, 06:30:14 AM
GREAT WHITE

What part of this was unclear?

Mods, please move this thread to GMD.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 16, 2016, 06:31:24 AM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-26402367

I remember when that happened.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: mikeyd23 on June 16, 2016, 06:42:10 AM
This article sums up a lot of my feelings on President Obama's reaction to the Orlando shooting:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/by-rejecting-%E2%80%98radical-islam%E2%80%99-obama-rejects-reality/ar-AAh4J9b?li=BBnb7Kz
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 07:20:29 AM
My argument is that blaming guns for mass shootings is short-sighted and not the root of the problem. You say that I'm comparing it to banning  cars but you're missing the point. Taking an inanimate object and assigning blame to it is more unproductive. The gun, the car, the knife, are useless without someone taking an incentive to give them power. When you use the weapon as the scapegoat, you're making excuses for people to behave how they want without repercussions. Maybe that's not your intention, but that's how it comes off. Forget the gun. Find out how someone like this was able to purchase a gun and remedy it.
It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote. 

I'm talking about lowering the amount of deaths that occur.  You know, saving lives.  About changing where the lines are drawn as to what weapons are available to the public. 

Again, you will never be able to prevent people from becoming murderous assholes.  That has always happened, and will continue to happen.  But if there are ways to lower the amount of deaths that occur during these instances, what's the problem?

As a matter of fact, I plan on purchasing one to keep in the house. There is no reason why we shouldn't be able to protect ourselves, our families, from criminals. I know the chances of a break-in in my neighborhood are slim to none, but I'd rather prepare for the worst.
No problem from me, you have the right to home defense.  I am a gunowner myself.  I am not talking about banning guns, and frankly, no one else is, either.  The only time I ever see "banning guns" or "taking away guns from citizens" talked about is when paranoid gun enthusiasts talk about "Obama wants to take our guns!"  Meanwhile, Obama hasn't proposed any such thing.

Oh, umm...

Lady Red Light, rock me tonight
Baby's got a way to make it alright
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 16, 2016, 08:25:29 AM
I'm not aware of each states laws concerning purchasing guns....but I do know in Missouri I can walk into a gun store and leave with a gun a half hour later. So, here are a couple thoughts I'd offer up that wouldn't bother me as a gun owner on how you could strengthen the process.

- Mandatory (2) week waiting period from time of sale of the gun. To purchase the gun you go through the Federal Background check like you do now but then the 2 week period would allow time for a LOCAL background check to be performed by whatever county you live in. There could be potential for them to know something the Feds don't. You set up criteria to look for.....like, domestic abuse calls that were never actual charges, or any other 'red flag' type habits.

- (15) Round Magazine Max on every firearm. Some would argue (15) is too many, but most lower caliber handguns (15) round capacity is pretty common. Also, I wouldn't be opposed to a Maximum Magazine "allowance" for rifles like the AR-15. Set it at 3 or 4 per individual Max and have the purchase of the (15) Round Magazines for Rifles go through the same background checks as the weapons themselves.

- Offer a program to where if you'd like higher capacity magazines, National Conceal Carry License in every State....etc....where individuals could pay a high premium price to obtain but it'd have a tough individual evaluation by FBI. I'd throw something like this in because I think there are people out there (like myself) who would pay whatever cost to obtain a National Conceal Carry License, and not be constrained by a magazine limit. I have a hard time believing that any one of these people would end up shooting up a mall or whatever....meaning, they aren't and wouldn't be the problem.   


I don't know....just spit balling ideas. I know what ISN'T an option is just banning certain guns in general because they look scary. We already have the automatic gun ban so there really isn't anything else left to 'ban' other than the 'scary' looking guns that are just dressed up versions of 'normal' guns....meant to look 'scary' to drive sales.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 08:30:31 AM
Gary, I think all of those are sensible ideas.   :tup
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 16, 2016, 08:42:35 AM
I think I told you guys, I played at the Station in Warwick, RI (the place that GW accidentally burned down) several times. One of my favorite places to play.

Stadler, I get what you mean about his voice. House of Broken Love is sooooooo f*cking awesome.

That and "Save Your Love".
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 16, 2016, 08:43:56 AM
1.  Waiting period and local background check in addition to feds:  Already have that in CA. 
2.  15-round magazine limit:  Child's play.  It is 10 here.  Plus lots of other mandatory modifications to the guns themselves that put severe limits on the numbers of California-approved guns manufacturers are willing to produce and sometimes dramatically increases the prices.
3.  Federal CCR and max magazine program:  Interesting idea.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 16, 2016, 08:50:47 AM
Gary, I think all of those are sensible ideas.   :tup

The one thing I would like to see is the FBI Profiler program tackle this issue HARD.  Psychological science has progressed to an astounding degree, and while it isn't perfect, it is better than "hmm, his name is Hussein.  Put him on the list."

I think we can generate a 15 or 20 item "checklist" of factors that at a minimum elevates the scrutiny for that person.  No one ever said this would be easy, nor should it be.  But as long as people are dying we should be putting in the effort, not just infringing rights as if they don't matter. 

I don't at all have a problem denying guns to those that have not demonstrated the ability to handle them safely and responsibly.   My issue is always with the inversion of the general criminal justice mantra: "it is better to have ten guilty men go free so that not one innocent man goes to jail".  Or something like that.   It just seems that with Great White, it's usually "it is better to infringe the rights of ten law-abiding citizens so that one criminal can't."

By the way, anyone know that Jack Russell did felony time (8 year sentence, 18 months served) for killing someone in a botched robbery?  True story.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 16, 2016, 09:00:57 AM
By the way, anyone know that Jack Russell did felony time (8 year sentence, 18 months served) for killing someone in a botched robbery?  True story.

And it all comes back to guns.  I win.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 09:57:32 AM
By the way, anyone know that Jack Russell did felony time (8 year sentence, 18 months served) for killing someone in a botched robbery?  True story.

And it all comes back to guns.  I win.

Call me a shot in the dark
Firing blind, firing wild
I'm a shot in the dark
No stopping me, you'll never see
Lord I'm a shot in the dark
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 16, 2016, 10:00:16 AM
Lock this thread and archive it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 10:25:46 AM
Maybe some day when the hurting is gone
Baby, some way love will stay on
Maybe some day we will do no wrong
I know we can make it all right, babe, if we try
Maybe some day
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 16, 2016, 11:13:50 AM
I'm not aware of each states laws concerning purchasing guns....but I do know in Missouri I can walk into a gun store and leave with a gun a half hour later. So, here are a couple thoughts I'd offer up that wouldn't bother me as a gun owner on how you could strengthen the process.

- Mandatory (2) week waiting period from time of sale of the gun. To purchase the gun you go through the Federal Background check like you do now but then the 2 week period would allow time for a LOCAL background check to be performed by whatever county you live in. There could be potential for them to know something the Feds don't. You set up criteria to look for.....like, domestic abuse calls that were never actual charges, or any other 'red flag' type habits.

- (15) Round Magazine Max on every firearm. Some would argue (15) is too many, but most lower caliber handguns (15) round capacity is pretty common. Also, I wouldn't be opposed to a Maximum Magazine "allowance" for rifles like the AR-15. Set it at 3 or 4 per individual Max and have the purchase of the (15) Round Magazines for Rifles go through the same background checks as the weapons themselves.

- Offer a program to where if you'd like higher capacity magazines, National Conceal Carry License in every State....etc....where individuals could pay a high premium price to obtain but it'd have a tough individual evaluation by FBI. I'd throw something like this in because I think there are people out there (like myself) who would pay whatever cost to obtain a National Conceal Carry License, and not be constrained by a magazine limit. I have a hard time believing that any one of these people would end up shooting up a mall or whatever....meaning, they aren't and wouldn't be the problem.   


I don't know....just spit balling ideas. I know what ISN'T an option is just banning certain guns in general because they look scary. We already have the automatic gun ban so there really isn't anything else left to 'ban' other than the 'scary' looking guns that are just dressed up versions of 'normal' guns....meant to look 'scary' to drive sales.
Damn, Gary, you just made Hillary sound like Wayne LaPierre. Doubt even she'd suggest the waiting period.

The only thing I'd amend is that there should probably be some sort of exigent circumstances fast-track for the waiting period. If Johnny thinks that some chick is a likely candidate for the OJ treatment she should be able to buy a gun immediately. Something like that. I know that it's an extremely unlikely thing to really matter, but that's an area I'd like covered.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 16, 2016, 11:36:05 AM
Damn, Gary, you just made Hillary sound like Wayne LaPierre. Doubt even she'd suggest the waiting period.

The only thing I'd amend is that there should probably be some sort of exigent circumstances fast-track for the waiting period. If Johnny thinks that some chick is a likely candidate for the OJ treatment she should be able to buy a gun immediately. Something like that. I know that it's an extremely unlikely thing to really matter, but that's an area I'd like covered.

I think there could be room to work on a fast track purchase. Maybe it's just an additional fee or if you're already in the system as a gun owner, or there could be a program along the lines of a conceal carry where you take a 8 or 16 hour course...have an evaluation....whatever and then after that you gain a certification to where you don't have to wait 2 weeks? Who knows.

  I think an extensive local jurisdiction background check is needed though. I mean, does the FBI know if Joe Schmo is on bail and facing a trial for beating his wife...and he decides to go buy a gun to kill her? Or if Old Man Ray got ticked off at the last school board meeting and made a scene and threatened that everyone would be sorry. 

Like we've all mentioned, there is room to work where 'both sides' would end up happy. It's a give and take issue but the problem is neither side wants to 'give' at all...only take.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 16, 2016, 12:40:31 PM
My argument is that blaming guns for mass shootings is short-sighted and not the root of the problem. You say that I'm comparing it to banning  cars but you're missing the point. Taking an inanimate object and assigning blame to it is more unproductive. The gun, the car, the knife, are useless without someone taking an incentive to give them power. When you use the weapon as the scapegoat, you're making excuses for people to behave how they want without repercussions. Maybe that's not your intention, but that's how it comes off. Forget the gun. Find out how someone like this was able to purchase a gun and remedy it.
It's almost like you didn't read what I wrote. 

I'm talking about lowering the amount of deaths that occur.  You know, saving lives.  About changing where the lines are drawn as to what weapons are available to the public. 

I was thinking the same thing about you. I've never said I'm against restrictions. My argument in this thread has always been about the blame being wrongfully centered around the guns themselves and I'm pretty sure I've said it numerous times that I'm all for keeping the guns out of the hands of the wrong types of people.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 02:02:28 PM
Yet you keep talking about "blaming" guns.  No one "blames" the guns.  Guns don't pick themselves up and start shooting.  No one can sue a gun.  No one can charge a gun with a crime. "Blaming" guns is a nonsensical phrase that has no bearing here.

But regulating guns in sensible ways is seemingly a sensible thing. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 16, 2016, 02:35:39 PM
I totally blame guns.  With their wee beady eyes, and that smug look on their faces. "Oh, you're gonna shoot my chicken! Ohhhhh!"
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 16, 2016, 02:43:27 PM
I still blame video games
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 16, 2016, 02:57:32 PM
I totally blame guns.  With their wee beady eyes, and that smug look on their faces. "Oh, you're gonna shoot my chicken! Ohhhhh!"
:facepalm:
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 16, 2016, 03:29:36 PM
I still blame video games

Judas Priest.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Cable on June 16, 2016, 05:56:36 PM
I still blame video games

Judas Priest.


Throw Ozzy into there too. "Get the gun. Get the gun. Shoot shoot shoot shoot shoot." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb_WmsKD1_s (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vb_WmsKD1_s)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Cool Chris on June 16, 2016, 08:14:32 PM
I was a huge fan of The Angel Song myself. I remember dancing to it with Casey Acker in 8th grade.

Also, having had an ignition interlock on my car, I don't think most of you understand how they really work.

And, guns.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 17, 2016, 05:35:39 AM
Yet you keep talking about "blaming" guns.  No one "blames" the guns.  Guns don't pick themselves up and start shooting.  No one can sue a gun.  No one can charge a gun with a crime. "Blaming" guns is a nonsensical phrase that has no bearing here.

But regulating guns in sensible ways is seemingly a sensible thing.

Then I guess as long as we somewhat agree, we're good. However, I do recall throughout this thread people disagreeing with the mental health of people being the issue and also focusing more on the guns themselves. I know I didn't imagine it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 17, 2016, 07:38:48 AM
Mental health is an area that we need to a better job with in this country in ALL respects, not just regarding gun safety.

Hey, we're good either way, pal.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 17, 2016, 09:22:38 AM
Mental health

QUIET RIOT thread.  Mods, please move this...

wait, never mind.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 17, 2016, 10:35:59 AM
Oy vey
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 17, 2016, 10:45:53 AM
See, now this is exactly why I feel like we need to reinstitute beatings of forum members that piss me off.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 17, 2016, 11:07:26 AM
See, now this is exactly why I feel like we need to reinstitute beatings of forum members that piss me off.

Take it to the "Things That Piss Me Off" thread bub.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 17, 2016, 12:11:24 PM
Mental health

QUIET RIOT thread.  Mods, please move this...

wait, never mind.

Talk about your low dubrow humor
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 17, 2016, 12:37:24 PM
See, now this is exactly why I feel like we need to reinstitute beatings of forum members that piss me off.

I thought you already banned that guy.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 17, 2016, 12:41:58 PM
See, now this is exactly why I feel like we need to reinstitute beatings of forum members that piss me off.

I thought you already banned that guy.
I've tried, but can't find a good enough reason.  And his hair and pics in Ace Frehley makeup give him +10 defense points that resist the typical ban attack.  I feel kinda powerless.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Sir GuitarCozmo on June 17, 2016, 02:53:05 PM
Insufficient data at the moment, Starchild.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: lonestar on June 17, 2016, 06:43:13 PM
Mental health is an area that we need to a better job with in this country in ALL respects, not just regarding gun safety.


This. So much this.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: jammindude on June 18, 2016, 09:27:37 AM
I live with someone who is bipolar and has PTSD.   

IMO...dancing around mental health issues is going to be *extremely* difficult to the point of near impossibility.   The reason why essentially comes down to money, but it's more complicated than that. 

True mental health professionals understand perfectly that mental health is not a pure black and white game.   Talk to any mental health professional, and one thing they will say is pretty common.....the entire issue is so vastly complex that what we don't understand FAR outweighs what we do understand.    The highest professionals are often "shooting in the dark" because what works for one person, won't necessarily work with another.   And sometimes they have to experiment with certain drug "cocktails" to get just the right adjustment for just the right person.   Then there's other issues like, where do you draw the line as to whether someone is "employable" or not....or even "dangerous" or not?    We can't even establish a clearly defined line in the sand as to whether someone actually *NEEDS* help or just needs someone to talk to.      Take this entire grey area, and then pit it up against insurance companies (who aren't mental health experts at all) who want clearly defined parameters as to what they will cover and what they won't cover.     Heck, it took my wife over a year just to go through the system to get disability.   2 mental health professionals were ready to declare her as completely unemployable....but then everyone else wonders how many people like that can the system afford?

If this post sounds like a mess...that's because it is.   But I see both sides of the issue, and I'm not sure there is a solution.   (short of my beliefs that God is going to heal all when he comes to take over)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Tick on June 23, 2016, 02:37:17 PM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/13445554_1145597122145189_5343871548596312961_n.jpg?oh=cd7ddec7d8b643fcbc372bf6fb7a4da7&oe=5804925E)
Saw this on Facebook. Makes you think. Why was Paris so different in the social media response?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 23, 2016, 02:59:35 PM
Uh, it wasn't. It's a different group of people saying each of these things. Us Godless liberal heathens never said to pray for Paris, and I'm pretty sure your side doesn't blame guns for Orlando. And for that matter, my side is only saying that you shouldn't sell guns to freaking terrorists.  :lol
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 23, 2016, 03:26:07 PM
Uh, it wasn't.]

It was from my view of social media.  I didn't see the profile pictures or #'s like the Paris attack.  But that's only from my view of social media which is different for everyone.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 23, 2016, 03:40:47 PM
I think you tend to see people wanting to show solidarity, and in this case it wasn't just Americans, but gay Americans. So instead of the stars and stripes you saw rainbows everywhere. I saw plenty of people sharing pictures from tributes around the world, some of which were quite nice.  https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/orlando-buildings-lit-for-orlando-shooting_us_575eaccee4b0e39a28ae0f87

Dallas didn't do half bad, in our typically garish fashion.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ckzd2fFUYAABhKH.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 23, 2016, 03:45:21 PM
No need to pull out our manhood to see which is bigger.  Both events are horrific. The gun issue is a microcosm on how I see Americans vote.

It's become so damn black and white.  The folks in the gray are such a minority these days.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 23, 2016, 03:53:23 PM
But this could just be an effect of how social media works.  You only see what your friends are doing and what facebook/google/the company I work for target for you based on your interests.  I think it's totally possible someone sees what that meme shows and also for someone to see the exact opposite.

Niether of which really show any truth (or deeper meaning) to anything IMO, it's just social media.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: pogoowner on June 23, 2016, 03:54:21 PM
Uh, it wasn't.]

It was from my view of social media.  I didn't see the profile pictures or #'s like the Paris attack.  But that's only from my view of social media which is different for everyone.
I saw a lot of hashtags, posts, rainbow-themed pictures, etc. I don't believe any of the social media platforms made a photo filter for it like Facebook did for Paris, though, so there were less profile picture changes.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 24, 2016, 07:46:25 AM
There may have been fewer things like that because this shooting was in America, and mass shootings here, while certainly awful, are no longer shocking, like the one in Paris was.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 24, 2016, 07:51:17 AM
There may have been fewer things like that because this shooting was in America, and mass shootings here, while certainly awful, are no longer shocking, like the one in Paris was.

This. When I first saw the news of Orlando, my first reaction was "Huh, a little bigger than usual".

Also, in terms of global support for events like this, other countries probably look at this as us being victims of our own stupidity. They see a country with stores like the one below, and they figure we have it coming. We sign up for and accept the likelihood of events like this occurring. Why should they feel bad for us?

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2837/9691579873_20ebdbeaf7_b.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 24, 2016, 08:09:34 AM
we have it coming.

this is my view on it. You reap what you sow....don't act surprised and dismayed when this culture we live in is exactly what "we've" been crafting the past 30 years with some of the decisions our country and culture have been making.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 24, 2016, 01:11:47 PM
we have it coming.

this is my view on it. You reap what you sow....don't act surprised and dismayed when this culture we live in is exactly what "we've" been crafting the past 30 years with some of the decisions our country and culture have been making.

But you don't get to say that based on one picture.    I've lived in the US for just south of 50 years, I've lived in the north (Connecticut), the south (Atlanta, Charlotte), the east (Philadelphia) and the west (California).  I've NEVER EVER ONCE seen a store like that.  Not to say they don't exist, but you don't want me to think Poland is a bunch of dummies, Russia is a bunch of paranoid drunks, Italy is a bunch of... you get the point, so you can't judge 315 million people and 3.8 million square miles on one picture. 

We are reaping what we have sown, but it's not that simple.  The Twitter-verse will take that and say "well, don't ban guns, don't bitch about the shootings".   WRONGLY.   

There's no easy summation of this, there's no easy answer, and there's no "social media"-friendly meme that addresses this sufficiently to even REMOTELY be useful. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: gmillerdrake on June 24, 2016, 01:17:28 PM
we have it coming.

this is my view on it. You reap what you sow....don't act surprised and dismayed when this culture we live in is exactly what "we've" been crafting the past 30 years with some of the decisions our country and culture have been making.

But you don't get to say that based on one picture.    

I'm not basing it off this one instance of shootings.....or just shootings in general. I'm basing it off all the depravity we see in our culture every day. And not just the depravity but very obvious lack of moral compass and ethical attributes. Certainly the wrong thread to start this type of discussion because it has hardly anything to do with shootings when I said what I said and more to do with what we've made 'important' in our culture and what we've kicked out of it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 24, 2016, 01:23:19 PM
we have it coming.

this is my view on it. You reap what you sow....don't act surprised and dismayed when this culture we live in is exactly what "we've" been crafting the past 30 years with some of the decisions our country and culture have been making.

But you don't get to say that based on one picture.    

I'm not basing it off this one instance of shootings.....or just shootings in general. I'm basing it off all the depravity we see in our culture every day. And not just the depravity but very obvious lack of moral compass and ethical attributes. Certainly the wrong thread to start this type of discussion because it has hardly anything to do with shootings when I said what I said and more to do with what we've made 'important' in our culture and what we've kicked out of it.

(I didn't mean you personally...)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 24, 2016, 04:43:44 PM
There may have been fewer things like that because this shooting was in America, and mass shootings here, while certainly awful, are no longer shocking, like the one in Paris was.

I don't think that just because it happens less frequently somewhere else that it should be considered a greater tragedy or given greater attention. People are going to cherry pick their causes based on their own ideologies and biases. They'll treat deaths like a statistic and rationalize why one should be considered more grievous than another. Both sides are guilty of it, so I won't pretend it's just a liberal thing, though they tend to do more whining about injustices. I don't think you were speaking for yourself and saying that one deserves more attention, or maybe you were. If you were, then I disagree. If not, then I disagree with the notion anyway.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: hefdaddy42 on June 27, 2016, 08:15:41 AM
I'm not saying that either one is more deserving (whatever that means) of anything.

I'm just saying that a shooting in Paris is more shocking than a shooting here.  We react and do things beyond the normal when something truly shocks us because it is so beyond normal.  This is no longer the case with mass shootings here in the U.S. for many people.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 27, 2016, 08:42:46 AM
I'm not saying that either one is more deserving (whatever that means) of anything.

I'm just saying that a shooting in Paris is more shocking than a shooting here.  We react and do things beyond the normal when something truly shocks us because it is so beyond normal.  This is no longer the case with mass shootings here in the U.S. for many people.

I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is how people react to it. It shouldn't matter how many times it happens. A life is a life, whether it's the 1st shooting of the year or the 10th. People have become desensitized.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 27, 2016, 09:39:13 AM
I'm not saying that either one is more deserving (whatever that means) of anything.

I'm just saying that a shooting in Paris is more shocking than a shooting here.  We react and do things beyond the normal when something truly shocks us because it is so beyond normal.  This is no longer the case with mass shootings here in the U.S. for many people.

I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is how people react to it. It shouldn't matter how many times it happens. A life is a life, whether it's the 1st shooting of the year or the 10th. People have become desensitized.

So you're saying we should all react in disgust every 1-2 days to this stuff happening in the Middle East too, yea? I can get on board with that.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 27, 2016, 10:07:57 AM
I'm not saying that either one is more deserving (whatever that means) of anything.

I'm just saying that a shooting in Paris is more shocking than a shooting here.  We react and do things beyond the normal when something truly shocks us because it is so beyond normal.  This is no longer the case with mass shootings here in the U.S. for many people.

I don't disagree with that. What I disagree with is how people react to it. It shouldn't matter how many times it happens. A life is a life, whether it's the 1st shooting of the year or the 10th. People have become desensitized.

So you're saying we should all react in disgust every 1-2 days to this stuff happening in the Middle East too, yea? I can get on board with that.

Or the roughly 1,300 deaths EVERY DAY here in the States from smoking.  This "outrage" has some merit of course, but it's selective. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on June 27, 2016, 10:29:37 AM
I know you probably don't mean that as a serious comparison, but the people in Paris didn't choose to be shot. People choose to smoke and know of the consequences.

I think same can be useful in examining the outrage in the US vs the anguish in Paris.

In the US, it's perceived by many that our gun culture is directly responsible in part to mass shootings like this. That's why people are more angry than mournful. So many people see this as something that's easily preventable in comparison to the Paris shooting.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 27, 2016, 10:59:46 AM

So you're saying we should all react in disgust every 1-2 days to this stuff happening in the Middle East too, yea? I can get on board with that.


Who said anything about disgust? I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth. You're missing my point.


Or the roughly 1,300 deaths EVERY DAY here in the States from smoking.  This "outrage" has some merit of course, but it's selective. 


So you're comparing smoking, a habit that people freely choose, to someone getting killed by a psychotic radical Muslim in a shooting? If people want to choose their own path, that's one thing. It's another thing to be a victim at the whim of a madman.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 27, 2016, 11:02:07 AM
I know you probably don't mean that as a serious comparison, but the people in Paris didn't choose to be shot. People choose to smoke and know of the consequences.

I think same can be useful in examining the outrage in the US vs the anguish in Paris.

In the US, it's perceived by many that our gun culture is directly responsible in part to mass shootings like this. That's why people are more angry than mournful. So many people see this as something that's easily preventable in comparison to the Paris shooting.

But that's why the comparison is meaningful.   Why is "gun culture" so important for 2 deaths per day, but "free will culture" is not?   I understand the notion of the people not choosing to be shot, but then frame the argument as such.  It points to the disingenuousness of the positions.  If we're REALLY interested in keeping people alive, we'd worry about getting to the root of why they died in the first place, instead of making the argument about "outrage" and emotion.   The "gun culture" argument is from those that can't (or won't be bothered) to articulate a more meaningful analysis. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 27, 2016, 11:12:22 AM

Or the roughly 1,300 deaths EVERY DAY here in the States from smoking.  This "outrage" has some merit of course, but it's selective. 


So you're comparing smoking, a habit that people freely choose, to someone getting killed by a psychotic radical Muslim in a shooting? If people want to choose their own path, that's one thing. It's another thing to be a victim at the whim of a madman.

Then a life ISN'T a life.   If our interest is preserving life, why should it matter whence the danger comes?  And conversely, if we salute the value of free will, even if deaths are a result, why the difference with guns? 

Look, this isn't an attack; it's merely pointing out that most of the simplistic, baser arguments when it comes to guns tend to START with a conclusion and find the data to support it.   It's far more complex than "gun culture" or the latest craze, the "gun ownership versus gun homicides" charts that purport to show that the number of guns DIRECTLY causes the number of homicides (even though an eighth grader could drive her Big Wheel through the holes in that theory). 

When we found out what makes people smoke, it resulted in some reasonable changes to our regulatory scheme, including limiting the amount of nicotine that could be added to the cigarettes.  Why are we not looking at WHY that guy was able to look at 50 people in the face as he shot them dead?   Why doesn't THAT spark outrage?  Not the HOW he did it, but the WHY he did it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on June 27, 2016, 11:21:28 AM
But that's why the comparison is meaningful.   Why is "gun culture" so important for 2 deaths per day, but "free will culture" is not?   I understand the notion of the people not choosing to be shot, but then frame the argument as such.  It points to the disingenuousness of the positions.  If we're REALLY interested in keeping people alive, we'd worry about getting to the root of why they died in the first place, instead of making the argument about "outrage" and emotion.   The "gun culture" argument is from those that can't (or won't be bothered) to articulate a more meaningful analysis. 

It's an incredibly frustrating thing to examine with people though.

If you aren't choosing to focus on our gun culture or gun control and whatnot, then usually the other explanation get shot down just as well. A lot of the same people that cry about their gun right cry about "PC culture" and how everyone is just too sensitive nowadays. They say mental illness is over diagnosed and people just need to toughen up.

Yes, it definitely goes deeper than simply gun culture, but people really don't want to examine that either.

I know pretty much everyone in here has agreed that improving the backgrounds checks and regulations on guns is a good idea. I agree with that. I also agree that guns are simply the "how" in these scenarios. Just like you said above, we need to answer the "why."

All that said, I'm definitely for increased gun control or bans if it makes it more difficult for these kinds of massacres to occur. We might as well do something to quell the threats while we figure out the "why." That's something that's incredibly complex and even when it's found would likely take a generation to fully fix since it's likely something ingrained into our recently culture.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 27, 2016, 12:45:11 PM
But that's why the comparison is meaningful.   Why is "gun culture" so important for 2 deaths per day, but "free will culture" is not?   I understand the notion of the people not choosing to be shot, but then frame the argument as such.  It points to the disingenuousness of the positions.  If we're REALLY interested in keeping people alive, we'd worry about getting to the root of why they died in the first place, instead of making the argument about "outrage" and emotion.   The "gun culture" argument is from those that can't (or won't be bothered) to articulate a more meaningful analysis. 

It's an incredibly frustrating thing to examine with people though.

If you aren't choosing to focus on our gun culture or gun control and whatnot, then usually the other explanation get shot down just as well. A lot of the same people that cry about their gun right cry about "PC culture" and how everyone is just too sensitive nowadays. They say mental illness is over diagnosed and people just need to toughen up.

Yes, it definitely goes deeper than simply gun culture, but people really don't want to examine that either.

I know pretty much everyone in here has agreed that improving the backgrounds checks and regulations on guns is a good idea. I agree with that. I also agree that guns are simply the "how" in these scenarios. Just like you said above, we need to answer the "why."

All that said, I'm definitely for increased gun control or bans if it makes it more difficult for these kinds of massacres to occur. We might as well do something to quell the threats while we figure out the "why." That's something that's incredibly complex and even when it's found would likely take a generation to fully fix since it's likely something ingrained into our recently culture.

I was with you 100% until the last paragraph, particularly "ban" and the second to last sentence.  I don't at all want to do something because "we might as well do something".  Whether you respect the right or not, we don't as a rule quell fundamental rights because "we might as well do something".  Trump - whom I don't support, by the way - wanted to stop Muslims from coming in the country "while we figure it out", on the grounds that "we might as well do something".   I agree with background checks, and I agree with aligning "no fly lists" and "increased scrutiny", that's just an efficiency if you ask me, but that's where we have to stop.  It might be hard; no one said it would ever be easy.   And we don't limit ourselves to the "easy questions" only.  If it's worth it, it's worth putting in the hard work. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on June 27, 2016, 01:05:24 PM
I can respect that. I just have no horse in the gun fight really. So I won't fight to ban guns or anything, but if it happened, I wouldn't exactly be upset either.

But I will say I don't think your comparison of Trump banning Muslims from entering the country and a ban on guns is completely fair. I can definitely see the similarities the rhetoric surrounding them, but I wouldn't put banning people the same as banning objects.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 27, 2016, 01:52:32 PM

So you're saying we should all react in disgust every 1-2 days to this stuff happening in the Middle East too, yea? I can get on board with that.


Who said anything about disgust? I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth. You're missing my point.

Okay, so we should see the Orlando shooting, or 9/11 as equal to the mass murders going on in the ME? If that's not your point, then I'm afraid I don't know what is.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 27, 2016, 02:12:49 PM
It's all disgusting.   Mental issues or extremists,  it makes me run the gambit of emotions.  Though, I've been number of the violence lately.  Sad to say.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 27, 2016, 02:24:27 PM
I won't lie when I say I don't feel the same after these shootings, you see them so much now that it just doesn't have that same affect.  The fact that I feel like I am getting used to it is really sad.  I know I am not as emotional as most so maybe that is part of it, but it's definitely makes me feel like I'm just used to this and it's becoming normal to see every month or so.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kingshmegland on June 27, 2016, 02:26:10 PM
Completely agree.   I feel bad about it but you feel helpless. What can you do?
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Prog Snob on June 27, 2016, 02:38:51 PM

Or the roughly 1,300 deaths EVERY DAY here in the States from smoking.  This "outrage" has some merit of course, but it's selective. 


So you're comparing smoking, a habit that people freely choose, to someone getting killed by a psychotic radical Muslim in a shooting? If people want to choose their own path, that's one thing. It's another thing to be a victim at the whim of a madman.

Then a life ISN'T a life.   If our interest is preserving life, why should it matter whence the danger comes?  And conversely, if we salute the value of free will, even if deaths are a result, why the difference with guns? 

Look, this isn't an attack; it's merely pointing out that most of the simplistic, baser arguments when it comes to guns tend to START with a conclusion and find the data to support it.   It's far more complex than "gun culture" or the latest craze, the "gun ownership versus gun homicides" charts that purport to show that the number of guns DIRECTLY causes the number of homicides (even though an eighth grader could drive her Big Wheel through the holes in that theory). 

When we found out what makes people smoke, it resulted in some reasonable changes to our regulatory scheme, including limiting the amount of nicotine that could be added to the cigarettes.  Why are we not looking at WHY that guy was able to look at 50 people in the face as he shot them dead?   Why doesn't THAT spark outrage?  Not the HOW he did it, but the WHY he did it.

I said a life isn't a life in reference to shootings. Did you read the second half of the sentence because your response tells me you didn't?

Your second and third paragraphs I'm assuming aren't aimed at me. They seem to speak of someone who thinks guns are the problem and not the people using them, which I have argued against multiple times. I have always said we need to look at the why and not the how. People can be evil regardless of the weapons they possess.

Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 28, 2016, 06:29:39 AM
https://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/28/texas-mother-who-killed-daughters-called-family-meeting-to-start-rampage-police-say.html?intcmp=hpbt2

Texas mother who killed daughters called family meeting to start rampage, police say

Quote
Fort Bend County Sheriff Troy Nehls said a family argument led to the shooting Friday evening at a home outside the Houston suburb of Fulshear. Christy Sheats, 42, convened the meeting in the living room of the home that was attended by her husband Jason Sheats, and her daughters, Taylor Sheats, 22, and Madison Sheats, 17, according to the sheriff's office.

"During that meeting, Christy Sheats held up a gun and shot both girls," the sheriff's office said.

Jason Sheats and the daughters ran outside where Madison Sheats collapsed and died. Jason Sheats ran to the end of the cul-de-sac.

Christy Sheats shot Taylor Sheats one more time on the street. A witness told investigators Christy Sheats then went back into the home, reloaded her gun and shot Taylor once more.

When officers arrived, they saw Christy Sheats shooting one of her daughters in the street, the sheriff's office said.

An officer fatally shot Christy Sheats after she refused to obey commands to drop her handgun. Taylor Sheats was taken to a Houston hospital, where she died.

A Facebook profile consistent with Sheats' biographical details included a pro-gun post, alongside posts about how much she loved members of her family.

Madison Davey, a friend of the Sheats daughters, told KTRK-TV that the two girls were caught up in the troubled marriage of their parents. She said that Jason Sheats told her that Christy Sheats shot her daughters because she wanted him to suffer.

Davey also said that the weapon used in the murders was passed down from Christy Sheats’ great-grandfather “to protect the family.”

The sheriff’s office also revealed Monday that officers had been called out 14 times since 2012 to the Sheats’ home


From another source

Quote
Records obtained by the Chronicle show that authorities had visited the family home multiple times, but the sheriff would not disclose why. A representative with his office [said] that the calls were for “previous altercations” involving the mother’s “mental crisis.

Call me crazy... but maybe the type of person that has had the police called to their house 14 times in four years shouldn't be allowed to own a gun. I know it's not that cut and dry, but there was obviously known shit wrong in this household for some time now.

The mother back in March wrote the following to her Facebook newsfeed; "It would be horribly tragic if my ability to protect myself or my family were to be taken away, but that's exactly what Democrats are determined to do by banning semi-automatic handguns."

No it's not, you horrible cunt. We're determined to stop shit like this from occurring as much as humanly possible.

 
Killed in broad daylight by their batshit crazy lunatic of a mother who believed any hint at gun control was some massive democrat conspiracy. If I was the father of these girls, I'd probably be blowing my brains out the first chance I got.
(https://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2687946.1466890037!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_1200/article-mom-0625.jpg)
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 28, 2016, 06:53:41 AM
Terrible story, but I'm sorry this is not another tent pole story for gun control. I agree that crazy people shouldn't own guns but I'd go even farther and say that crazy people shouldn't be living in society. That bitch was crazy and just goes to show how nothing is done about crazy people. The police go to your house 14 times and they know she's crazy yet nothing is done. No psyc evaluatation.  Even if they took her guns she'd probably stab them or poison them or something.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 28, 2016, 08:41:59 AM
There are SOOOO many intervening steps here that to key on "gun control" is kind of missing the point.   Where was the Dad?  Running into the cul-de-sac?   As a dad, I would have expected that at least ONE of the bullets that hit those children would have gone through Jason first, as he was doing everything in his power to save them.   Tackle her.  Punch her in the face.   Throw the remote at her.  SOMETHING.   (And for the record, as much I as think the gun thing is way overplayed, I would absolutely agree that that woman, based on what it says here, perhaps shouldn't have had a gun. It's a right, but I don't have any problem in showing capacity in order to fully exercise it).

Jesus; we keep saying "we have to DO something", but it always seems like the only people that should be are the nameless and the faceless.  The man.  The government.   What the fuck is wrong with a person that actively and knowingly lives in a house with a gun where the police have been 14 times?   

Honestly - and I feel this too, so it's not a screed - but the "gun control" angle is in my view a last-ditch, desperation hail mary because we've failed so consistently in so many other ways. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 28, 2016, 08:54:20 AM
There are SOOOO many intervening steps here that to key on "gun control" is kind of missing the point.   Where was the Dad?  Running into the cul-de-sac?   As a dad, I would have expected that at least ONE of the bullets that hit those children would have gone through Jason first, as he was doing everything in his power to save them.   Tackle her.  Punch her in the face.   Throw the remote at her.  SOMETHING.   (And for the record, as much I as think the gun thing is way overplayed, I would absolutely agree that that woman, based on what it says here, perhaps shouldn't have had a gun. It's a right, but I don't have any problem in showing capacity in order to fully exercise it).

Jesus; we keep saying "we have to DO something", but it always seems like the only people that should be are the nameless and the faceless.  The man.  The government.   What the fuck is wrong with a person that actively and knowingly lives in a house with a gun where the police have been 14 times?   

Honestly - and I feel this too, so it's not a screed - but the "gun control" angle is in my view a last-ditch, desperation hail mary because we've failed so consistently in so many other ways.

That's what I was intending to get at with that post and kind of went into rant mode instead, coupled with the irony that this woman wanted guns to protect her family and ended up massacring them in the street.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 28, 2016, 08:56:10 AM
I reckon the father's got some serious metal problems or a self-inflicted gunshot wound in his future. Don't think I'd want to go through life knowing that I let the problem get that far out of hand, and then took off running when it culminated in my daughters getting shot. None of us know how we'd react in that situation, and I won't fault anybody for falling apart when bad craziness breaks out, but it's not like a last second act of heroism was the only way to prevent what happened.

Also, I don't see how this is really a gun control issue in the modern construct. If she'd gone out and bought the gun last week, then maybe we'd have something to talk about. This gun had been in the family for ages and I'm not sure what part gun control legislation is supposed to find out about it and seize it.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 28, 2016, 09:52:00 AM
I'm not sure how I would react in most situations where mine or those around me life is at risk BUT I know 100% that if my kid's lives were threatened that I would react to do ANYTHING to try and protect them even if that mean giving my life. The father failed at his most important role as a parent. I can't even imagine running for the hills knowing that your kids are going to die. He's obviously a piece of shit as well.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 28, 2016, 10:24:06 AM
Piece of shit is way too harsh. It said that he ran out with the daughter, so he might have mistakenly thought getting her out of the house was the best way to go. Moreover, until you've been in that situation you don't know how you're going to handle it. Who's to say you don't fall into the fetal position and shit yourself after the first bang? I don't think that makes you a POS.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: kaos2900 on June 28, 2016, 11:31:15 AM
Maybe POS was to harsh. I'll just say he was a bad parent.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 28, 2016, 02:14:49 PM
For the record, I'm not suggesting he should have been Superman.  I'm saying that somewhere in the last 12 months there's a way of solving the problem.  SOME way.  Hell, wake up in the middle of the night and throw the gun out the fucking window and say "I don't know what happened to it?!?" (unless she'd blame the kids).   Disable it.  Dump the bullets in a bucket of water.   Hell, shoot HER.  SOMETHING.

I'm not calling him a pussy, but even if he was, even pussies can be heroes in the right set up. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Implode on June 28, 2016, 02:18:38 PM
It's easy to say things like that in hindsight, especially from an outside perspective. We really don't know the ins and outs of the situation.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 28, 2016, 10:40:51 PM
It's easy to say things like that in hindsight, especially from an outside perspective. We really don't know the ins and outs of the situation.

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Implode here. None of us have any idea what the situation was like, all we saw was the explosive moment and have some very vague info on the rest. If all of these situations are so easily solved, then they wouldn't be happening as often as they do.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 29, 2016, 09:14:17 AM
It's easy to say things like that in hindsight, especially from an outside perspective. We really don't know the ins and outs of the situation.

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Implode here. None of us have any idea what the situation was like, all we saw was the explosive moment and have some very vague info on the rest. If all of these situations are so easily solved, then they wouldn't be happening as often as they do.

I'm not sure I agree with that.   While I agree that we don't know what the situation is like, I think it's not a matter of "not easily solved".   I think there are other things at play, and we have lost a degree of personal accountability.  It's his house, ostensibly.   Compromises are always made, but don't we have ANY lines of responsibility anymore?   I was married to someone with some deep issues, and yet, I knew there was a line between people just living a bad life and hurting themselves, and when it spilled over to hurting others who didn't have a choice in the matter.   It's not something I'm proud of (and I wouldn't do it today) but I will cop to watering down and/or dumping out the vodka.   It doesn't always work, but when it's the difference between someone passing out or going over the edge, you do it.   

I think we have to start changing our assumptions.  I think we have to start with the premise that "it's your house; what did you do to make it better" as opposed to starting from the premise "what was he going to do?".   This may not be the paradigm example, perhaps Nancy Lanza is a better one.   

 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 29, 2016, 09:23:06 AM
But here, we don't have any idea what was going on in their lives other than a few paragraphs of an article.  I am absolutely abut personal responsibility.  But I for one can't say I have any idea whether or not this guy exercised any. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Adami on June 29, 2016, 09:29:48 AM
It's easy to say things like that in hindsight, especially from an outside perspective. We really don't know the ins and outs of the situation.

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Implode here. None of us have any idea what the situation was like, all we saw was the explosive moment and have some very vague info on the rest. If all of these situations are so easily solved, then they wouldn't be happening as often as they do.

I'm not sure I agree with that.   While I agree that we don't know what the situation is like, I think it's not a matter of "not easily solved".   I think there are other things at play, and we have lost a degree of personal accountability.  It's his house, ostensibly.   Compromises are always made, but don't we have ANY lines of responsibility anymore?   I was married to someone with some deep issues, and yet, I knew there was a line between people just living a bad life and hurting themselves, and when it spilled over to hurting others who didn't have a choice in the matter.   It's not something I'm proud of (and I wouldn't do it today) but I will cop to watering down and/or dumping out the vodka.   It doesn't always work, but when it's the difference between someone passing out or going over the edge, you do it.   

I think we have to start changing our assumptions.  I think we have to start with the premise that "it's your house; what did you do to make it better" as opposed to starting from the premise "what was he going to do?".   This may not be the paradigm example, perhaps Nancy Lanza is a better one.   

 

I'm all for accountability. But we're looking at it as "this guy was living with a mentally unstable murderer". Until that happened, he may have just seen it as living with the love of his life who was going through a rough time. I doubt he ever considered the possibility that this would happen.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 29, 2016, 09:54:35 AM
It's easy to say things like that in hindsight, especially from an outside perspective. We really don't know the ins and outs of the situation.

I'm going to go ahead and agree with Implode here. None of us have any idea what the situation was like, all we saw was the explosive moment and have some very vague info on the rest. If all of these situations are so easily solved, then they wouldn't be happening as often as they do.

I'm not sure I agree with that.   While I agree that we don't know what the situation is like, I think it's not a matter of "not easily solved".   I think there are other things at play, and we have lost a degree of personal accountability.  It's his house, ostensibly.   Compromises are always made, but don't we have ANY lines of responsibility anymore?   I was married to someone with some deep issues, and yet, I knew there was a line between people just living a bad life and hurting themselves, and when it spilled over to hurting others who didn't have a choice in the matter.   It's not something I'm proud of (and I wouldn't do it today) but I will cop to watering down and/or dumping out the vodka.   It doesn't always work, but when it's the difference between someone passing out or going over the edge, you do it.   

I think we have to start changing our assumptions.  I think we have to start with the premise that "it's your house; what did you do to make it better" as opposed to starting from the premise "what was he going to do?".   This may not be the paradigm example, perhaps Nancy Lanza is a better one.   

 

I'm all for accountability. But we're looking at it as "this guy was living with a mentally unstable murderer". Until that happened, he may have just seen it as living with the love of his life who was going through a rough time. I doubt he ever considered the possibility that this would happen.

When the police have to come to your house 14 times in a four year period, I'd say that's a great indication that something is seriously wrong in your household.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 29, 2016, 10:01:08 AM
Not necessarily.  We have no idea why they were called.  For all we know, half those calls may have been because the home was burglarized, and the other half because of a stalker issue.  There is no context whatsoever in the article to know whether those calls were related, how severe the conduct was, or what.  No details at all.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 29, 2016, 10:03:54 AM
Not necessarily.  We have no idea why they were called.  For all we know, half those calls may have been because the home was burglarized, and the other half because of a stalker issue.  There is no context whatsoever in the article to know whether those calls were related, how severe the conduct was, or what.  No details at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/27/texas-mom-killed-by-police-after-she-shot-two-daughters-to-death-police-say/

Quote
Records obtained by the Chronicle show that authorities had visited the family home multiple times, but the sheriff would not disclose why. A representative with his office told People magazine that the calls were for “previous altercations” involving the mother’s “mental crisis.”

Make of that what you will.

I'm going to rule multiple burglaries or break ins out seeing as there were firearms in the house, and based on Facebook posts, the mother seemed pretty eager to use them.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: El Barto on June 29, 2016, 10:06:17 AM
I saw that, and it led me to believe that it was most likely the father who called them. That's why I'm troubled by his involvement (or lack thereof) in all of this.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 29, 2016, 10:19:36 AM
Bosk, Adami, your points are duly noted, and of course I understand the facts of the matter trump any grand pronouncements I might make.  I feel like the point is, though, that one situation that is up for debate, that could go either way is not the same as 14 (or more; how many WEREN'T reported?  Or fell just shy of the standard to report?) that could go either way.  At some point there's a theme that shouldn't be ignored.

I think a "responsibility culture" is one that doesn't miss the themes in favor of treating each individual event as a completely discrete, independent events.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 29, 2016, 10:37:10 AM
Bosk, Adami, your points are duly noted, and of course I understand the facts of the matter trump any grand pronouncements I might make.  I feel like the point is, though, that one situation that is up for debate, that could go either way is not the same as 14 (or more; how many WEREN'T reported?  Or fell just shy of the standard to report?) that could go either way.  At some point there's a theme that shouldn't be ignored.

I think a "responsibility culture" is one that doesn't miss the themes in favor of treating each individual event as a completely discrete, independent events.
Well, if you can derive a "theme" and leap to such ironclad conclusions about what happened from a half page article, all I can say is, I'm glad that if I ever need a jury, you wouldn't be on it.  :lol 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: KevShmev on June 29, 2016, 10:53:24 AM
Jeez, what's with some of this rush to judgment? The guy just lost his kids and wife in a horrific manner, and some are blaming him already? Good grief.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 29, 2016, 11:05:33 AM
Bosk, Adami, your points are duly noted, and of course I understand the facts of the matter trump any grand pronouncements I might make.  I feel like the point is, though, that one situation that is up for debate, that could go either way is not the same as 14 (or more; how many WEREN'T reported?  Or fell just shy of the standard to report?) that could go either way.  At some point there's a theme that shouldn't be ignored.

I think a "responsibility culture" is one that doesn't miss the themes in favor of treating each individual event as a completely discrete, independent events.
Well, if you can derive a "theme" and leap to such ironclad conclusions about what happened from a half page article, all I can say is, I'm glad that if I ever need a jury, you wouldn't be on it.  :lol

You WOULD if you were the defendant.  You always want a contrarian on the jury.  ;) 

But no, I'm not saying I can definitively leap to such ironclad conclusions.  It's all relative; I'm not saying he's 100% at fault, I'm just saying I'm not prepared to completely absolve a guy that had to call the police on his wife 14 times without more information. 
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: cramx3 on June 29, 2016, 11:11:39 AM
I'd probably lean towards the father not doing all he can to save his family (not in the heat of the moment, but in the time leading up to the event).  But one other point is that sometimes those closest to the situation are the most blind to it.  I doubt he ever thought things would come to this and therefore I find it hard to say this guy is such a terrible person.  I just do think, he could have done something to help prevent this at some point along the way.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: bosk1 on June 29, 2016, 02:19:06 PM
Bosk, Adami, your points are duly noted, and of course I understand the facts of the matter trump any grand pronouncements I might make.  I feel like the point is, though, that one situation that is up for debate, that could go either way is not the same as 14 (or more; how many WEREN'T reported?  Or fell just shy of the standard to report?) that could go either way.  At some point there's a theme that shouldn't be ignored.

I think a "responsibility culture" is one that doesn't miss the themes in favor of treating each individual event as a completely discrete, independent events.
Well, if you can derive a "theme" and leap to such ironclad conclusions about what happened from a half page article, all I can say is, I'm glad that if I ever need a jury, you wouldn't be on it.  :lol

You WOULD if you were the defendant.  You always want a contrarian on the jury.  ;) 

Well, no.  I've empaneled enough juries to know I would always want jurors who can weigh the evidence and think for themselves to form reasoned conclusions rather than making wild leaps based on just a few incomplete snippets.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Chino on June 30, 2016, 07:38:30 AM
https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/29/us/texas-woman-shoots-daughters/index.html?sr=twCNN062916texas-woman-shoots-daughters1026PMVODtopPhoto&linkId=26059966

Quote
Jason Sheats told police his wife suffered from depression, Nehls said. She was taking "numerous" prescription medications and seeing a therapist. She had been admitted to a private mental health facility three times in recent years for attempted suicide, Nehls said.

Quote
Jason Sheats told police that his wife of more than 20 years began a "downward spiral" after the 2012 death of her beloved grandfather, from whom she received the gun, Nehls said. Her mother died two months later, worsening her condition.

Days before the shootings Christy Sheats had a fight with her oldest daughter in which she tried to ground Taylor and forbid her from seeing her fiancee, Jason Sheats told police. The father disagreed with his wife that grounding was an appropriate punishment for a 22-year-old, Nehls said.

I'm going to continue making my leaps and conclusions and say that this woman was a known nutcase, and there was plenty of warning that maybe having a gun in the house was a terrible fucking idea.
Title: Re: More shootings...are the media creating more?
Post by: Stadler on June 30, 2016, 08:31:58 AM
Bosk, Adami, your points are duly noted, and of course I understand the facts of the matter trump any grand pronouncements I might make.  I feel like the point is, though, that one situation that is up for debate, that could go either way is not the same as 14 (or more; how many WEREN'T reported?  Or fell just shy of the standard to report?) that could go either way.  At some point there's a theme that shouldn't be ignored.

I think a "responsibility culture" is one that doesn't miss the themes in favor of treating each individual event as a completely discrete, independent events.
Well, if you can derive a "theme" and leap to such ironclad conclusions about what happened from a half page article, all I can say is, I'm glad that if I ever need a jury, you wouldn't be on it.  :lol

You WOULD if you were the defendant.  You always want a contrarian on the jury.  ;) 

Well, no.  I've empaneled enough juries to know I would always want jurors who can weigh the evidence and think for themselves to form reasoned conclusions rather than making wild leaps based on just a few incomplete snippets.

One, I was joking, and two, I think with all due respect (and respect is certainly due) I think you're over exaggerating a bit, at least with me.  I don't think I'm engaging in "wild leaps based on... incomplete snippets".   

I fully copped to the idea that more facts are necessary, but that AS A GENERAL PROPOSITION I think there's a lot one can do.  I've already said I dealt with an alcoholic, sometimes unpredictable, on occasion violent ex-wife (she hit me twice during our marriage, though I didn't respond in kind) and though I had a license to carry, and access to as many guns as I could ever need, I opted to not have one in the house.   I current