Jump to content

Inevitable CR Thread About Latest Mass Shooting

MaybeACoordinator

By MaybeACoordinator
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But I'm not wrong.

You bring up race in every thread, so you’re bound to be correct eventually. This just isn’t one of those times. The gun lobbies point to Chicago as an example of gun laws being ineffective, not due to the demographics of the city. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18652

Posted
Posted
Just now, Chrispy said:

You bring up race in every thread, so you’re bound to be correct eventually. This just isn’t one of those times. The gun lobbies point to Chicago as an example of gun laws being ineffective, not due to the demographics of the city. 

And the opposite side of that coin is Indiana's lax gun laws and freedom in this country to cross state lines.

But that has nothing to do with why the right always wants to focus on big bad Chicago and its south side residents. I wonder what most of them have in common.

If it's America, it's about race. It always has been and always will be until white people are no longer the politically dominant group.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

And the opposite side of that coin is Indiana's lax gun laws and freedom in this country to cross state lines.

But that has nothing to do with why the right always wants to focus on big bad Chicago and its south side residents. I wonder what most of them have in common.

If it's America, it's about race. It always has been and always will be until white people are no longer the politically dominant group.

Most on the right are weary of more stringent gun laws, hence the focus on Chicago. Making it about race is more than a little strange. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpiralOut

SpiralOut 1809

Posted
Posted

Doesn't seem to be the reason for him shooting the place up, but the shooter was supposedly a liberal who hated Trump.

People dug through his posts on Reddit and he had some spats with people from The_Donald subreddit, calling them Trumptards and whatnot. 

 

 

 

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
formermav43

formermav43 4599

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Yep. Plus every other type of tragedy is politicized almost instantly. 911 gets us two wars, a brand new cabinet level dept, and restrictions on our rights. Every other terrorist act or attempted act causes policy changes on the fly. Shoes off, laptop out.  OKC happens, rental trucks and fertilizer purchases are monitored and flagged. A chemical spill occurs? New regulations are put in place to lower the chance of it happening again. A kid drowns in a backyard pool? We add fencing regulation. A restaurant is spreading food borne illness?  We shut it down instantly. 

On every other possible tragedy, not only do we not wait, we act as rapidly as possible to prevent reoccurrence.

But someone shoots up a place? Too soon. 

Most of those responses were ill-conceived with unforeseen, long term, negative consequences. This is a better argument for the opposite of the point you’re making.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, David Dennison said:

And the opposite side of that coin is Indiana's lax gun laws and freedom in this country to cross state lines.

But that has nothing to do with why the right always wants to focus on big bad Chicago and its south side residents. I wonder what most of them have in common.

If it's America, it's about race. It always has been and always will be until white people are no longer the politically dominant group.

Well, they aren't complaining about the cities that have higher homicide rates and higher black populations like Gary, New Orleans, Memphis, Jackson, St Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit, so its not only a black thing.

Of course, saying its about gun restrictions is false as well.  All of the listed cities are worse than Chicago, some much worse, and most have lax to non-existent gun control laws.

What its really about is Obama.  Obama is from Chicago so its his fault that it has the 24th highest murder rate in the country, and they pretend that its actually 1st and that the top 23 cities are as safe as houses.  Before Obama was elected, Chicago's murder rate was much higher than it is now.  It wasn't discussed on chrispy's email forwards until 2008 though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18652

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Well, they aren't complaining about the cities that have higher homicide rates and higher black populations like Gary, New Orleans, Memphis, Jackson, St Louis, Baltimore, and Detroit, so its not only a black thing.

Of course, saying its about gun restrictions is false as well.  All of the listed cities are worse than Chicago, some much worse, and most have lax to non-existent gun control laws.

What its really about is Obama.  Obama is from Chicago so its his fault that it has the 24th highest murder rate in the country, and they pretend that its actually 1st and that the top 23 cities are as safe as houses.  Before Obama was elected, Chicago's murder rate was much higher than it is now.  It wasn't discussed on chrispy's email forwards until 2008 though.

Yep. None of those cities gave us our first black president.

Murica.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, formermav43 said:

Most of those responses were ill-conceived with unforeseen, long term, negative consequences. This is a better argument for the opposite of the point you’re making.

Yeah, which ones?  Since 9-11 nobody has hijacked nor brought down a commercial airplane in the US.  Those changes worked, and its also the only event that caused changes that had negative consequences.  However, all of those consequences were primarily borne by the Iraqi and Afghani people and not Americans.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
formermav43

formermav43 4599

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, FondrenRoad said:

Yeah, which ones?  Since 9-11 nobody has hijacked nor brought down a commercial airplane in the US.  Those changes worked, and its also the only event that caused changes that had negative consequences.  However, all of those consequences were primarily borne by the Iraqi and Afghani people and not Americans.  

 

I don’t view endless wars, bloated defense spending, an unnecessary cabinet department, the Patriot Act,  the TSA, on and on as positives. Nor am I convinced there is a causal link between panic-driven policies like removing my shoes and no hijackings. 

I’ll grant that you’re right in that 9-11 (or, more generally, the “war on terror”) is the primary driving force behind what I’m talking about and for me to say “most” was probably an overstatement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
American Swindle

American Swindle 102

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

Doesn't seem to be the reason for him shooting the place up, but the shooter was supposedly a liberal who hated Trump.

People dug through his posts on Reddit and he had some spats with people from The_Donald subreddit, calling them Trumptards and whatnot. 

 

 

 

I'm really wondering if he was under the influence of drugs (legal or illegal.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hank Kingsley

Hank Kingsley 20678

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, SpiralOut said:

Doesn't seem to be the reason for him shooting the place up, but the shooter was supposedly a liberal who hated Trump.

People dug through his posts on Reddit and he had some spats with people from The_Donald subreddit, calling them Trumptards and whatnot. 

 

 

 

Um, no. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
On 8/27/2018 at 11:11 AM, David Dennison said:

 it's America, it's about race. It always has been and always will be until white people are no longer the politically dominant group.

Yeah cause then whoever is politically dominant will be egalitarian and color blind, with liberty and justice for all....  wing-ed unicorns will roam freely....

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ndawg

ndawg 1242

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah cause then whoever is politically dominant will be egalitarian and color blind, with liberty and justice for all....  wing-ed unicorns will roam freely....

This is ultimately white supremacy's final gasp of fear -- utterly terrified that, soon, white people will suffer from the same cruelty we inflicted on everyone else. I don't buy it. White supremacy was borne out of some unique circumstances. Namely, our ability to terrorize other cultures with superior technology and the availability of Christianity as a means of justifying it to the masses (and ultimately indoctrinating them as well).

There is no brown supremacy or black supremacy waiting on the wings to exploit us the minute they gain a majority. I think you're cynicism is unfounded here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, ndawg said:

This is ultimately white supremacy's final gasp of fear -- utterly terrified that, soon, white people will suffer from the same cruelty we inflicted on everyone else. I don't buy it. White supremacy was borne out of some unique circumstances. Namely, our ability to terrorize other cultures with superior technology and the availability of Christianity as a means of justifying it to the masses (and ultimately indoctrinating them as well).

There is no brown supremacy or black supremacy waiting on the wings to exploit us the minute they gain a majority. I think you're cynicism is unfounded here.

Cynicism ?  No, just that racism exists in every race and culture.  I don't envision any race war or retribution type scenarios for America.  

I'm betting Dennison is one of those black people can't be racist, only white people can be, types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ndawg

ndawg 1242

Posted
Posted
Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Cynicism ?  No, just that racism exists in every race and culture.  I don't envision any race war or retribution type scenarios for America.  

I'm betting Dennison is one of those black people can't be racist, only white people can be, types.

Point of order: we need to distinguish between prejudice and racism. Many black people in the world are indeed prejudiced against whites. Is it wrong? Absolutely, in the sense that it can and does lead to injustices. Is that racist? Not necessarily. Racism refers to the belief that ones race is inherently superior to another and thus deserving of a higher place in society. White supremacy is an example of systemic racism, the kind that harms all members of a minority group, which is also what I think you were suggesting might be likely if we see a non-white majority in the US.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, ndawg said:

Point of order: we need to distinguish between prejudice and racism. Many black people in the world are indeed prejudiced against whites. Is it wrong? Absolutely, in the sense that it can and does lead to injustices. Is that racist? Not necessarily. Racism refers to the belief that ones race is inherently superior to another and thus deserving of a higher place in society. White supremacy is an example of systemic racism, the kind that harms all members of a minority group, which is also what I think you were suggesting might be likely if we see a non-white majority in the US.

Nope how did you get that ?  

OK prejudiced or racist, they both exist everywhere. White people are just another color in a long list of prejudiced and sometimes racist peoples of the planet.  

The point was white people being replaced doesn't mean racial harmony is going to bacon the order of the day, any more than it is now.  As a society we are moving forward.  I tend to ignore the hate groups because they're just not statistically relevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45546

Posted
Posted
41 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Yeah cause then whoever is politically dominant will be egalitarian and color blind, with liberty and justice for all....  wing-ed unicorns will roam freely....

Good point, except for the the fact that the left ALREADY ELECTED A FUCKING BLACK GUY.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Foosters

Foosters 17727

Posted
Posted
46 minutes ago, SpiralOut said:

Good thing I put "supposedly" in there.

 

Yeah good thing. Just like how Rush on his show said "It appears that the shooter was an active part of the Trump resistance." No harm. No accusations. Just asking questions.

 

Here's a tip for next time: In case you haven't noticed, every time there is a shooter, 4chan and Reddit go to work photo-shopping posts and images to make it look like the perpetrator is antifa or a lefty. Every single time.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpiralOut

SpiralOut 1809

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Foosters said:

Yeah good thing. Just like how Rush on his show said "It appears that the shooter was an active part of the Trump resistance." No harm. No accusations. Just asking questions.

Yes, because posting on this board is the same as speaking to millions of people on a nationally broadcast radio show.  /facepalm

I get you're a nut who takes this shuper sheriously and all, but I saw some reports he was a Trump basher, I specifically avoided blaming the attack on that, and I made sure not to state with certitude what I'd seen online was fact.  I didn't know I was being held to the journalistic standards of the NYT, but I don't really think I was out of line.

So, in short, clutch your pearls harder, Shirley.

 

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

SpiralOut 1809

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

"pearl clutching" is a really annoying metaphor.  Analogy.  Meme.  Whatever.  Stop using it, it's already reached "Baby On Board" status.

Ask me how many fucks I give.

Edited by SpiralOut
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
On 8/28/2018 at 2:16 PM, ndawg said:

This is ultimately white supremacy's final gasp of fear -- utterly terrified that, soon, white people will suffer from the same cruelty we inflicted on everyone else. I don't buy it. White supremacy was borne out of some unique circumstances. Namely, our ability to terrorize other cultures with superior technology and the availability of Christianity as a means of justifying it to the masses (and ultimately indoctrinating them as well).

There is no brown supremacy or black supremacy waiting on the wings to exploit us the minute they gain a majority. I think you're cynicism is unfounded here.

You're part way there, but that isnt the biggest fear of white supremacists.  They'd probably be happy being an oppressed but separate race if they could pick that outcome. 

But you're missing their biggest fear. "White" is actually a mixed bag of nearly all recessive genes. They fear being mixed out of existence. And having a President who was 50% "white" but who appeared and was considered entirely "black" only exacerbated that fear.  This is also why years ago, they fought to consider Homer Plessy "black" in spite of him being 7/8 "white."  

The future is the mixed race kid. I guess that's "brown." But it's also perfectly fine because people actually love their own kids just like Obama's mother loved him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 32694

Posted
Posted
Yes, because posting on this board is the same as speaking to millions of people on a nationally broadcast radio show.  /facepalm
I get you're a nut who takes this shuper sheriously and all, but I saw some reports he was a Trump basher, I specifically avoided blaming the attack on that, and I made sure not to state with certitude what I'd seen online was fact.  I didn't know I was being held to the journalistic standards of the NYT, but I don't really think I was out of line.
So, in short, clutch your pearls harder, Shirley.
 
Don't worry, we all know you would have hurried over here to post the rumor you'd heard just as quickly if it was that the shooter was a big Trump supporter. Right everyone?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
atomheartbevo

atomheartbevo 89409

Posted
Posted (edited)
18 hours ago, Lurch said:

 

Republicans, NRA, etc. better move fast to clean this kind of stuff up, because I think most of us gun owners know this guy should never have had access to, and been able to buy firearms

The alternative is that the GOP and NRA can once again dig in their heels, and then, as I've said, we are going to see a mass shooting that is live-streamed to the world, where kids are being gunned down while people are watching on Facebook or twitter or whatever.

At that point, the GOP and NRA will not have any kind of control over gun control regulations, and the gun control lobby will run a train on gun owners, because the public will be in no mood for the NRA.  Parkland, Sutherland Springs, etc. have been edging a lot of folks in the middle closer and closer to supporting much more strict gun control.

Edited by atomheartbevo
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SpiralOut

SpiralOut 1809

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Huckleberry said:
On 8/28/2018 at 4:13 PM, SpiralOut said:
Yes, because posting on this board is the same as speaking to millions of people on a nationally broadcast radio show.  /facepalm
I get you're a nut who takes this shuper sheriously and all, but I saw some reports he was a Trump basher, I specifically avoided blaming the attack on that, and I made sure not to state with certitude what I'd seen online was fact.  I didn't know I was being held to the journalistic standards of the NYT, but I don't really think I was out of line.
So, in short, clutch your pearls harder, Shirley.
 

Don't worry, we all know you would have hurried over here to post the rumor you'd heard just as quickly if it was that the shooter was a big Trump supporter. Right everyone?

Actually, yeah.  I don't give a fuck about idiots on the left or right.  Except wishing I could shoot them all into the Sun and be done with them.

A lot of posters on this board included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

Not really topical or germane to anything in the current news cycle, but I had the following interaction with my elementary age child today and it got me thinking:

He said they do lockdown drills and the way that he described them reminds me of how we used to do fire drills (and maybe how boomers used to do cold war/nuke drills) in that you are doing your work/routine and then an alarm will go off and you are practicing what you would do as as surprise and unplanned event. This runs counter to when they first started doing drills a few years ago which were more of a planned ordeal and I'd get a note sent home to me explaining "talk to your kids about lockdown so they dont get scared/emotional, we are going to practice them on friday, the 7th" or something like that.

So anyways, in a few short years we've gone from them being a new, introduced measure to a normalized "fire drill" for kids and my child said that the Principal actually tested them yesterday and knocked on the gym door and some kids answered the door and they all failed (surmising the Principal is role playing an active shooter), so they were reprimanded or failed or something.

Anyways, I found this extremely interesting; half fascinating and half disturbing. And this is from a good school district (public) in the upper-middle class part of the bell curve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FondrenRoad

FondrenRoad 4378

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Not really topical or germane to anything in the current news cycle, but I had the following interaction with my elementary age child today and it got me thinking:

He said they do lockdown drills and the way that he described them reminds me of how we used to do fire drills (and maybe how boomers used to do cold war/nuke drills) in that you are doing your work/routine and then an alarm will go off and you are practicing what you would do as as surprise and unplanned event. This runs counter to when they first started doing drills a few years ago which were more of a planned ordeal and I'd get a note sent home to me explaining "talk to your kids about lockdown so they dont get scared/emotional, we are going to practice them on friday, the 7th" or something like that.

So anyways, in a few short years we've gone from them being a new, introduced measure to a normalized "fire drill" for kids and my child said that the Principal actually tested them yesterday and knocked on the gym door and some kids answered the door and they all failed (surmising the Principal is role playing an active shooter), so they were reprimanded or failed or something.

Anyways, I found this extremely interesting; half fascinating and half disturbing. And this is from a good school district (public) in the upper-middle class part of the bell curve.

Why does what you say in the last paragraph surprise you?  School mass shootings have largely taken place in suburban and upper middle class schools. 

I have wondered why that is. Social stress and expectations are higher? Or maybe the "hardening" of inner city schools during the gang violence days of the 80s and 90s makes them more secure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hank Kingsley said:

It's disturbing that elementary school kids have to be reprimanded for instinctually answering a door because of a possible active shooter scenario. This shit will have long term effects mentally on many children. 

 

It's the world we live in. I don't live in a scary zip code, yet my kids know never to answer the door, but to come get one of us (mom or dad) instead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, FondrenRoad said:

Why does what you say in the last paragraph surprise you?  School mass shootings have largely taken place in suburban and upper middle class schools. 

I have wondered why that is. Social stress and expectations are higher? Or maybe the "hardening" of inner city schools during the gang violence days of the 80s and 90s makes them more secure?

That's a good point in your first sentence and you are spot on and it's not something I had thought about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...