Jump to content

Another mass shooting


Darth Ender
 Share

Recommended Posts

Link

 

Person A: "If everyone had a gun, this wouldn't have happened!"

Person B: "That's insane, that would just cause more attacks and higher body counts... we need to ban all guns!"

Person C: "Okay, let's just have all school personnel carry guns!"

Person D: "That is even more insane! We really need to do more for those that are mentally unhealthy."

Everyone: Let's just forget this until it happens again and have the same conversation...

 

What is interesting is the guy posted about doing this on 4chan and people were encouraging him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is interesting is the guy posted about doing this on 4chan and people were encouraging him.

Without seeing the entire thread it's hard to know just how disturbed to be by it.

 

I read a Daily Mail article on it, which focused like 90% on the people who were encouraging the shooter and giving him tips, while (it seemed?) glossing over him being called him a sicko/coward and reported (again, possibly?) to the FBI.

 

Regardless, knowing that there are people out there who are ready to literally explode with mindless and horrible violence like this, it's incredibly irresponsible and fucked up to egg somebody on who is saying stuff like that, even if you are pretty sure they are joking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's 4chan. If you expect anything more/different you're fooling yourself.

I don't see how that's relevant, though?

 

Not being combative because you are Krawlie, either. I mean, if a good person does something shitty and a bad person does something shitty... sure, maybe you are more surprised by the good person's shitty actions, but the actions themselves are still equally shitty, are they not?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link

 

Person A: "If everyone had a gun, this wouldn't have happened!"

Person B: "That's insane, that would just cause more attacks and higher body counts... we need to ban all guns!"

Person C: "Okay, let's just have all school personnel carry guns!"

Person D: "That is even more insane! We really need to do more for those that are mentally unhealthy."

Everyone: Let's just forget this until it happens again and have the same conversation...

 

What is interesting is the guy posted about doing this on 4chan and people were encouraging him.

Don't forget...

 

Person E: "Obamamama's talking about gun control, so why doesn't he mention all of the shootings in Chicago?" "I bet you know why he says nothing about that!"

Person F: "They're trying to get rid of the 2nd Amendment!"

Person G: "Why should I be on a national registry? This is the start of the government trying to collect all guns!!" "Resist!"

Person H: Insert any incoherent, pro-gun statement from one of the Teds--Cruz or Nugent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget...

 

Person E: "Obamamama's talking about gun control, so why doesn't he mention all of the shootings in Chicago?" "I bet you know why he says nothing about that!"

Person F: "They're trying to get rid of the 2nd Amendment!"

Person G: "Why should I be on a national registry? This is the start of the government trying to collect all guns!!" "Resist!"

Person H: Insert any incoherent, pro-gun statement from one of the Teds--Cruz or Nugent.

As against these, however, you'll have persons I through L raising the specter of right wing, flag-and-bible gun nuts and their white male supremacy and entitlement goose stepping their way into making America into the fourth Reich, via the G.O.P and the NRA. Plus, throw in a goodly dose of pseudo-Freudian, feminist clap trap about guns being phallic symbols and compensation for male insecurity, etc. Just to make sure they hit all of the progressive, SJW bases.

 

I see plenty of that from my leftist friends and family, as well as Right Wing News or the English Defense League (and I have those kinds of friends and family also) posting their own brand of rubbish about how even the slightest gun control - registries, waiting periods and so forth, being a key part of Obama's master plan to turn America into a socialist Caliphate.

 

America doesn't have a gun problem. America doesn't have a mental health problem. America has a competing paranoid ideologies problem. Which is a mental health problem of sorts, I suppose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^ I think you are giving the shooters too much credit by calling it a "competing ideologies problem". I think you had it right at "mental health problem".

 

This school shooting epidemic has caught on for whatever reason, and it seems to be an American problem. The question is: Why? Why are students compelled to do this? What is the driving force behind it? What makes them wake up one day and say this is going to solve my problems? How do we fix it? Is more guidance counselors the answer? More focus on mental stability, not just academic achievelent? More discipline? More intramural structure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The shooters aren't getting credit by Kurgan's statement, in fact all credit is being taken away from them. They're a symptom, not a cause. They're the virus that wrecks your body because the physicians are too busy arguing over who's right to bother doing anything.

 

I have a Facebook friend who is German, her husband is Puerto Rican, and they live in Columbus. She repeatedly posts how scared she is to live in the US because of these shootings, yet she has the full ability to move anywhere, and regularly reminds people that she could go anywhere. So I don't think she's actually scared, I think she's just an attention whore pretending to care about an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest El Chalupacabra

I don't know what is worse:

 

1. The shooting itself

2. The fact shootings like this are so common that they are not shocking anymore

3. The shooter becomes the focus of the shooting and over the course of the coverage, transforms from evil villain to a victim of society somehow

4. When shootings like this happen, the same arguments on both sides that have been around since at least the 1980s (which is as far back as I clearly remember, anyway) are still trotted out and the issue becomes the political football of the week, while everyone seems to forget about the people who were actually injured or killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things we haven't yet tried, that I'd like to see happen is the de-glorification of these shootings in the media. Does anyone else think if these were handled like anything else and we didn't every publish the names of the killers that these shootings would decrease significantly?

 

I won't ever read the names of these people on the air now. I will talk about the victims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Don't forget...

 

Person E: "Obamamama's talking about gun control, so why doesn't he mention all of the shootings in Chicago?" "I bet you know why he says nothing about that!"

Person F: "They're trying to get rid of the 2nd Amendment!"

Person G: "Why should I be on a national registry? This is the start of the government trying to collect all guns!!" "Resist!"

Person H: Insert any incoherent, pro-gun statement from one of the Teds--Cruz or Nugent.

As against these, however, you'll have persons I through L raising the specter of right wing, flag-and-bible gun nuts and their white male supremacy and entitlement goose stepping their way into making America into the fourth Reich, via the G.O.P and the NRA. Plus, throw in a goodly dose of pseudo-Freudian, feminist clap trap about guns being phallic symbols and compensation for male insecurity, etc. Just to make sure they hit all of the progressive, SJW bases.

 

I see plenty of that from my leftist friends and family, as well as Right Wing News or the English Defense League (and I have those kinds of friends and family also) posting their own brand of rubbish about how even the slightest gun control - registries, waiting periods and so forth, being a key part of Obama's master plan to turn America into a socialist Caliphate.

 

America doesn't have a gun problem. America doesn't have a mental health problem. America has a competing paranoid ideologies problem. Which is a mental health problem of sorts, I suppose.

 

America has a gun problem to the level of this being the instant, anger/balls solution to a so-called problem, Too many refuse to think, as it is too much trouble, and poses a threat to their ready-to-break, hyper emotional (bitter) state of mind. America also has a gun problem when the survivors instantly know to reference the NRA as being a boulder in the way of gun control--an opinion offered by Andy Parker, the father of recently murdered WDBJ reported Alison Parker:

 

 

 

"... and we need to keep the pressure on the politicians to not be afraid of the NRA."

 

This past August, Parker and her camerman (Adam Ward) were murdered on-air by a former WDBJ employee who--among his admitted reasons for revenge was racism (he was black), sexual harassment (he was gay), and other details that--obviously--held no proven or legal weight whatsoever. He was just another whining bitch blaming the world for his own problems.

 

Andy Parker also touched on the aforementioned emotional reactions to the gun matter, as he--who comes from a home never owning guns--might buy one, because:

 

 

 

"When you're in the media, as you know, and when you're taking on an issue like this, there are a lot of people who take exception to what you're saying," Parker said during a press conference Friday afternoon.

 

He added that he doesn't own a gun but he may buy one to protect himself. Although he hasn't received any threats yet, he said he doesn't want to "take any chances."

 

"I don't own a gun. We don't have a gun in our family," Parker said. "I'm probably going to have to get one. Sad to say, but I -- unfortunately, that's just the world we live in."

 

So, it says much about the gun problem in the culture when the surviving family member must fear for his safety for challenging the seemingly all-powerful NRA, or other gun advocates. Further, selective news sources such as Fox (which has considerable national influence) or the Post all but dropped the once-obsessive coverage of the Parker/Ward murders once Parker's father zeroed in on the NRA. They did not want to attack the suffering father (and risk criticism even they could not handle), so they simply ignored him.

 

The "world we live in," as Parker observed, means the gun culture / problem in America, which is bolstered by politicians who refuse to even place one foot in the direction of stronger laws--which do not translate as a wholesale ban of all firearms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of the things we haven't yet tried, that I'd like to see happen is the de-glorification of these shootings in the media. Does anyone else think if these were handled like anything else and we didn't every publish the names of the killers that these shootings would decrease significantly?

 

I won't ever read the names of these people on the air now. I will talk about the victims.

I have wondered this as well. There is a certain grim glory seeking present in nearly all of these shootings; I read about them a lot because I'm dumb, and these shooters reference things like "meeting or exceeding" Columbine as a goal, so it's obvious there is a desire for recognition or "achievement."

 

I don't know the exact history of this, but I have heard that newspapers stopped reporting on suicides because the more they were reported, the more the suicide rate would rise. And when they stopped receiving press, the suicide rate dropped. No idea if it would work, but it is certainly nice to think the same thing would happen if the press just stopped naming (glorifying) these people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This angers me. The flippant ****ing IGNORANCE of the talking head-to use his particular clip,

then BLATANTLY follow it with the info is unconscionable to me.

 

 

And yes, not mentioning suicides and/or the victims has clearly shown to have a positive effect.

With Freedom of the Press, this would have to be self-regulation, but it IS possible.

 

There are many things that don't get mentioned in the media for safety. When a dignitary comes

to town and they close roads, we get maybe 5 minutes' advance warning which roads are closing. The

DOT darkens all cameras. Pretty sure this is unconstitutional but only the real crazies take

exception to it. We aren't allowed to accurately detail the opening and closing of our Hood Canal

bridge because the nuclear subs from Bremerton travel through it to go to the ocean.

 

I don't see a good reason NOT to mention a shooter's name om the air, especially if he's dea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Sheriff refused to give out the name of the shooter, CNN reported it immediately after.

Ugh, yeah I saw that.

 

There was also an article this morning (can't remember the source now, but it wasn't a tabloid), that went into a detailed profile of the shooter and how he was angry, singled out Christians, etc.

 

I can totally see a light going off over the head of some unstable, narcissistic person as they read all that coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is not looking for attention. Some are simply violent. Vester Flanagan, the murderer of reporters Alison Parker & Adam Ward was not looking for attention; his lengthy, printed manifesto was all about being black, gay and bitter. He had some career goals (which were never achieved), but he convinced himself that he was a victim of discrimination, so others had to pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He said that a high-profile mass-shooting (Charleston church) was his "tipping point," and expressed admiration for the Virginia Tech and Columbine shooters.

 

He also posted all that shit on social media and faxed the news a long-ass letter... yet he wasn't looking for attention?!? He was "simply violent?"

 

:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.