Jump to content

Mass Shootings


Nice Guy Eddie

Recommended Posts

All those AK-47 killing machines are not to protect liberty and personal security ... but to enforce the fascist-theocratic tyranny of MAGA-GQP when they start overthrowing elections. And it's coming, sooner or later.

Edited by BevoAbyss
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

I think he's either escaped their little dragnet or he's dead somewhere.

All it would take his him getting to some planned spot getting in a vehicle that won’t immediately tie to him and driving off. Boston is 2 hours away. I’ve been to Auburn/Lewiston, flew into Boston, drove to Portland, then Auburn, went back and forth to Portland  and the thing I remember about the drive is we seemed to go a different route each time based on who was driving (was with locals to Auburn). Lots of windy roads, alternate routes, minimal traffic, highways avoided to avoid cops, etc.

 

I’m honestly surprised we don’t have more of these events where the person does try and get away to do it all over again somewhere else. Gotta up the game to become infamous. Surprised we haven’t had a DC sniper copycat for example. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Hank Kingsley said:

 

Sorry, I don't buy this bullshit from Golden. 

Oh, now that YOUR family and constituents are in possible danger, you've changed your mind about assault weapons? Fuck you. Too many people in the country are unable to empathize unless they are directly affected. Again, fuck you. This is just political survival and an act of selfishness disguised as something noble. And mostly everyone falls for it. 

 

I assume you felt the same when Beto did this, in the literal exact same manner?   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is, apparently, an actual madman, but I don't get killing as many people as you can prior to suicide.

Above, it was reported that his note said that he would not be found alive. He evidently had the suicide planned from the start. What is going on with taking as many strangers as you can down with you?

  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume you felt the same when Beto did this, in the literal exact same manner?   

Uh, pretty sure Beto didn’t change his stance on AR-like weapons based on El Paso. It just made him angry enough to loudly restate said stance. Sadly, it wound up hurting him politically. What a country!
  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C-Man said:


Uh, pretty sure Beto didn’t change his stance on AR-like weapons based on El Paso. It just made him angry enough to loudly restate said stance. Sadly, it wound up hurting him politically. What a country!

I’m pretty sure he made contradictory statements just a few weeks apart from the events, actually.  And he rightfully lost his support and likely his political career for next decade.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fattyflattie said:

I’m pretty sure he made contradictory statements just a few weeks apart from the events, actually.  And he rightfully lost his support and likely his political career for next decade.  

How was he unclear on his views about guns?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Satchel said:

How was he unclear on his views about guns?

Well he went from “I’m 2nd friendly” to “now that it’s affected me, [hell yeah] I’m coming to take ones I deem apropos away from you”.

Which begs the question, why didn’t he care about the kids, adults, communities affected by those specific arms before it “hit home”?  Did he care, but decided it wasn’t good for his career, so he instead chose to be cowardly, and was untruthful?   I made a similar statement (I believe it’s human nature, after all) and my statement has been misconstrued and twisted in an attempt to continually call me out on these threads. I couldn’t gaf, really, but I do find it curious. I believe it’s because Beto’s politics are palatable for you, so it’s A-ok for him. My politics are not, so it’s ghoulish. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jesus, dude. He's always been for an assault weapons ban a la mid-90s to mid-aughts.  He didn't change from that.  You're so fucking determined to catch him in a gotcha that you don't even pay attention to facts.  Again, some things never change.  Try to be less thick.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fattyflattie said:

Well he went from “I’m 2nd friendly” to “now that it’s affected me, [hell yeah] I’m coming to take ones I deem apropos away from you”.

Which begs the question, why didn’t he care about the kids, adults, communities affected by those specific arms before it “hit home”?  Did he care, but decided it wasn’t good for his career, so he instead chose to be cowardly, and was untruthful?   I made a similar statement (I believe it’s human nature, after all) and my statement has been misconstrued and twisted in an attempt to continually call me out on these threads. I couldn’t gaf, really, but I do find it curious. I believe it’s because Beto’s politics are palatable for you, so it’s A-ok for him. My politics are not, so it’s ghoulish. 

It's not his fault that the majority of the electorate in this state is so rock-head stupid or has mastubatory tendencies to all things assault-weapony that he felt he had to tread carefully in order to have a CHANCE at winning an election. This state fucking sucks in many, many ways.

  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Not just this, it's a business decision on top of that. Gun manufacturers make BANK after mass shootings.

It's depressing that, after a particularly bad mass shooting, even gun nuts think, "Surely, this will be the one that actually causes action, and our unfettered access to guns and ammo will finally be limited. Better stock up!"

Sad that, 1, loading up on ammo is their initial thought, and, 2, that even they're expecting the government to try to do something about it, despite decades of evidence to the contrary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jimmyjazz said:

Jesus, dude. He's always been for an assault weapons ban a la mid-90s to mid-aughts.  He didn't change from that.  You're so fucking determined to catch him in a gotcha that you don't even pay attention to facts.  Again, some things never change.  Try to be less thick.

I don’t need to catch him in anything. Aside from a punchline, doubt we’ll ever hear his name again.  Whether he was born to be in it, or otherwise.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When wrestling with issue of unchecked gun violence, I am reminded of something called the Naaman Effect. In its abbreviated form , it is when we confer upon ourselves permission to live in a state of misalignment. This is particularly true for those of us who, for a variety of reasons, won’t fully live our convictions regarding the evils of gun violence and our tolerance of it. We know better, but we won’t o do better.  I have to believe that we will eventually be called to a place beyond the Naaman Effect and into a place of alignment that will prompt us to fight gun violence with integrity and without fear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When wrestling with issue of unchecked gun violence, I am reminded of something called the Naaman Effect. In its abbreviated form , it is when we confer upon ourselves permission to live in a state of misalignment. This is particularly true for those of us who, for a variety of reasons, won’t fully live our convictions regarding the evils of gun violence and our tolerance of it. We know better, but we won’t o do better.  I have to believe that we will eventually be called to a place beyond the Naaman Effect and into a place of alignment that will prompt us to fight gun violence with integrity and without fear.

We need to reach the Newman Effect….

8458fb7aca740e42ba85e1f24d240334.jpg
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, C-Man said:

It's not his fault that the majority of the electorate in this state is so rock-head stupid or has mastubatory tendencies to all things assault-weapony that he felt he had to tread carefully in order to have a CHANCE at winning an election. This state fucking sucks in many, many ways.

this is correct.

c'est comme ca.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I honestly forget with all the mental hoops the stupids have to jump through to to their desired conclusions.  What was the original conspiracy with this particular shooting in Nashville?  Something about the shooter being trans, so therefore unhinged and ineligible to buy assault-style weapons?  Or one of the Kennedy's?  Or Autism?  Or library books?  I sincerely don't remember on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know, following this shooting, I'd be fine with not allowing trans people to buy assault weapons. And then if we just work our way up with the other offenders not being allowed -- mentally ill, 18-year-olds, incels, 64-year-old millionaires, guys living in Allen, Texas, dudes living in Maine -- we will eventually hit critical mass and no longer have to worry about being in the shadow of a Las Vegas hotel during a concert or being in a 4th grade classroom after the morning awards assembly. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

You know, following this shooting, I'd be fine with not allowing trans people to buy assault weapons. And then if we just work our way up with the other offenders not being allowed -- mentally ill, 18-year-olds, incels, 64-year-old millionaires, guys living in Allen, Texas, dudes living in Maine -- we will eventually hit critical mass and no longer have to worry about being in the shadow of a Las Vegas hotel during a concert or being in a 4th grade classroom after the morning awards assembly. 

Maybe we could start the ban with "white guys".

Just spit-balling here.

Signed,

White Guy

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, C-Man said:

This is what all the MAGAt/Q-dipshits have been screaming conspiracy over for six months?

And that was fed by refusal to release the "manifesto".  There is nothing I see there that should have been hidden from the public. Maybe there is some other material that warrants, but that does not.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Maybe we could start the ban with "white guys".

Just spit-balling here.

Signed,

White Guy

Yes, but think of how much easier it would be to get a ban on trans owning assault weapons. 

"Hey, Texas representative, I want to pass a bill that bans trans folks from..."

"Sold! Great idea. Love it!"

"But I didn't even finish my sentence..."

"You said enough."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, henrygandorf said:

why does it matter?  i'm done with motives.

That's fine, but I disagree. I think that understanding the motives behind mass shootings is one important part of developing and implementing realistic and outcomes-oriented solutions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

That's fine, but I disagree. I think that understanding the motives behind mass shootings is one important part of developing and implementing realistic and outcomes-oriented solutions.  

ok.  i agree that data and analytics are important and should be studied.

over the past decade there have been about 6000 "mass shootings".  are we getting closer to understanding motives and implementing realistic and outcomes-oriented solutions?  do you think this manifesto will break the case wide open?

 

*mass shooting is defined by 4+ people getting killed or injured excluding the shooter

  • Hook 'Em 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

That's fine, but I disagree. I think that understanding the motives behind mass shootings is one important part of developing and implementing realistic and outcomes-oriented solutions.  

If only there were thousands of well-documented manifests, social media postings, message board rants, red flags, clinical diagnoses, worried family/friends calls to caseworkers and law enforcement, printed materials, underlined/highlighted books, subscription records, club memberships, donation histories, fringe group affiliations, extremist messages, audio recordings, video posts, and traceable firearms purchases that we could somehow look to in order to engage in, as you say, "understanding the motives behind mass shootings."  But alas, it's all just lost to time.  I'm sure another 500 or so of these could finally furnish us with the data set that could provide us with some shred of understanding of how these mass shootings get committed.  If only there were some evidentiary proof.  But we may never know.  

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I am not sure that it would, but why should we throw any data point out, esp a contemporary one?  

that wasn't a real question.  thought that was pretty obvious.

any controversy about why and when and if it would get released has absolutely zero to do with finding another data point and everybody with a working brain cell already knows that.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a weird way, this reminds me of the John Mulaney bit about how homicide investigations worked before DNA.  

"Hey Lieutenant, we found a pool of the killer's blood leading away from the victim's body.  Must have been some kinda struggle."

"Ewww, gross.  Mop it up.  Now then, back to my hunch..." 

with all we know after thousands of these, it's still...

"I wonder how the suspect managed to kill so many people before the police could arrive on scene."

"I don't know rookie.  I'm busy analyzing this manifesto's handwriting to make sure we're not being duped by some mass conspiracy." 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

if a rabid trumper/white nationalist did this, then it's thoughts and prayers and absolutely the wrong time to talk about legislation how dare you?

if someone from the left did this, then it's a false flag operation to make guns look bad.

i don't need no manifesto to tell me that.

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/7/2023 at 1:44 PM, henrygandorf said:

ok.  i agree that data and analytics are important and should be studied.

over the past decade there have been about 6000 "mass shootings".  are we getting closer to understanding motives and implementing realistic and outcomes-oriented solutions?  do you think this manifesto will break the case wide open?

 

*mass shooting is defined by 4+ people getting killed or injured excluding the shooter

Do you have a demo break down on that number? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...