Wednesday, 14 June 2017

'Top Republican hit' in multiple shooting - BBC News

quote [ A senior Republican politician and aides are among several shot during baseball practice in Virginia. ]
[SFW] [dystopian violence] [+7]
[by XregnaR@12:23pmGMT]

Comments

mechanical contrivance said @ 1:23pm GMT on 14th Jun
It wasn't terrorism, so that's good.
HoZay said @ 1:57pm GMT on 14th Jun
Described as a white guy, so must be a "bad apple".
C18H27NO3 said[1] @ 4:15pm GMT on 14th Jun
They will describe this guy as a extremist. A fascist, liberal pig, who ascribes to anarchy and hates freedom and the US. A violent socialist.

Meanwhile, the other people, like Dylan Roof, or the guy who shot Giffords, or the white supremacist that killed innocent bystanders protecting little girls in head scarves are described as having 'mental issues.'
sanepride said @ 2:04pm GMT on 14th Jun
Somebody's concluded this why? Because the shooter is apparently not a swarthy Muslim type?
Thing is, if he targeted these guys because they're members of Congress and/or Republicans, it's terrorism.
mechanical contrivance said @ 2:07pm GMT on 14th Jun
It's not terrorism because the government isn't saying it's terrorism.
sanepride said @ 2:25pm GMT on 14th Jun
From WaPo:
A law enforcement official said the initial indications from the scene in Alexandria do not suggest the gunman had a connection to international terrorism, but cautioned investigators are still gathering evidence.
If we understand 'international terrorism' to be acts specifically planned/directed by a foreign entity, that hasn't actually happened on US soil since 9/11/01.
HoZay said @ 2:30pm GMT on 14th Jun
Pudgy white guy can't be a terrorist, although he might be a "patriot".
sanepride said @ 2:37pm GMT on 14th Jun
Well he did shoot at Republicans. If it turns out his political leanings are on the left, I think somehow he'll be called a 'terrorist'. What we probably won't hear is that he was a 'patriot' exercising his 2nd Amendment options to water the tree of liberty.
rylex said @ 3:26pm GMT on 14th Jun
exercising 2nd amendment to shoot holes in the swamp to assist drainage.
C18H27NO3 said @ 4:16pm GMT on 14th Jun
His facebook account says he's an ardent bernie supporter.

More bad news for the left.
damnit said @ 2:44pm GMT on 14th Jun
Regarding the IRA:
"The organisation remains classified as a proscribed terrorist group in the UK and as an illegal organisation in the Republic of Ireland. Two small groups split from the Provisional IRA, the Continuity IRA in 1986, and the Real IRA in 1997."

On legally binding paper definition, your reasoning checks out.

Semantically, this is a terrorist act.
Kama-Kiri said[1] @ 5:03pm GMT on 14th Jun
No we do not understand it to mean planned/directed by a foreign entity. There are plenty of home grown terrorists all over the globe. Not so much in the US anymore, though it seems lately we are just one step away from being there.

I don't know what the difference is between an actual terrorist and a crazy person who thinks they are a terrorist, but my own rule of thumb is that terrorism is a group activity with a shared ideology and a working chain of command.
sanepride said @ 5:29pm GMT on 14th Jun
I don't think a terrorist needs to be a formal part of a larger group, any individual motivated by ideology qualifies. As for the 'crazy' factor, that's kind of a relative question. Is Dylan Roof crazy? The Portland stabber? The Pulse shooter? None of these guys had real, formal ties to organized groups with a 'working chain of command', but all claimed some type of ideological motive or at least allegiance to a cause.

On the other hand maybe it's easier to define who isn't a terrorist- the disgruntled employee, the romantically spurned, the gang-banger or cartel enforcer, the random spree-killer, or the nutjob so deranged as to have no coherent ideology (like the guy who shot Gabby Giffords etc).
sanepride said[1] @ 3:19pm GMT on 14th Jun
Alleged shooter has been identified as James T. Hodginson.
Update from WaPo:
Charles Orear, 50, a restaurant manager from St. Louis, said in an interview Wednesday that he became friendly with James T. Hodgkinson, whom law enforcement officials identified as the shooter, during their work in Iowa on Sen. Bernie Sanders’s presidential campaign. Orear said Hodgkinson was a passionate progressive and showed no signs of violence or malice toward others.

“You’ve got to be kidding me,” Orear said when told by phone. “I met him on the Bernie trail in Iowa, worked with him in the Quad Cities area.”

Orear described Hodgkinson as a “quiet guy” who was “very mellow, very reserved” when they stayed overnight at a Sanders’s supporter home in Rock Island, Ill., after canvassing for the senator.

“He was this union tradesman, pretty stocky, and we stayed up talking politics,” he said. “He was more on the really progressive side of things.”
HoZay said[1] @ 4:14pm GMT on 14th Jun
OK, maybe it is terrorism. Why doesn't Bernie and all his supporters renounce violence? - Rand Paul, probably.
King Of The Hill said @ 4:41pm GMT on 14th Jun
Bernie already made an excellent statement.

Shooter was 66 years old...I notice most people start getting a bit daffy the moment they retire or approach 70... See current president for prime example. He likely has some mental issues which I know is starting to be cliche for this sort of thing.
sanepride said @ 4:56pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:2]
The mental state of our current president aside, I take great exception to the notion that "most people start getting a bit daffy the moment they retire or approach 70".
Pretty much the same thing as saying that most millennials are entitled slackers.
i.e. ageist bullshit.
Marcel said @ 6:29pm GMT on 14th Jun
I'm not daffy because of my age. It's because the merry-go-round broke down.
3333 said[2] @ 3:32pm GMT on 14th Jun

Not long ago, when the fascists were laying waste to Berkley because they didn’t like the university’s choice of speaker, one of the commentators on this site wrote the following:

“Go ahead and mock the 'tolerant left' but this is the consequence of a stolen election and an illegitimate president who thinks he has a mandate to enforce a white nationalist agenda.”

Most of the other comments likewise supported the violence on that campus.

I’m curious. If violence at Berkley is ok, can we at least draw the line at shooting people during baseball games?


sanepride said @ 3:40pm GMT on 14th Jun
If your weird, qualifying comment here is intended to be a blanket repudiation of political violence regardless of ideology, I'm all in.
But I'm also gonna point out that the comment you quoted in no way 'supports' violence, only tries to contextualize it. Seems reasonable to try to understand why some folks lash out if we want to try to stop it, right?
arrowhen said @ 6:32pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:2 Underrated]
The word fascist has a more specific definition than merely "someone I don't like." You had a similar problem with the word troll a couple days ago.
3333 said[1] @ 11:32pm GMT on 14th Jun

I don’t have any problem, but thank you for your concern.

Both “fascist” and “troll” were used in the sloppy, quasi-literate manner in which they are most often employed on this site. It was out of deference to the hive mind. If it will aid you in comprehension, feel free to substitute “thug”, and “dickhead”. With regards to the term "troll", you could also substitute, “a mythical, cave-dwelling being depicted in folklore as either a giant or a dwarf”. But then, you’d probably get pissy about the ambiguity in stature.


damnit said @ 3:53pm GMT on 14th Jun
Can't wait for how they'll spin this
sanepride said @ 4:00pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 WTF]
No need to wait-
“America has been divided,” said Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), who, in suit and tie, stopped by the crime scene to pray and was viscerally angry about his colleagues being attacked. “And the center of America is disappearing, and the violence is appearing in the streets, and it’s coming from the left.”
bbqkink said @ 4:55pm GMT on 14th Jun
This is the first time in a long time we have seen a terrorist from the left. A lot of Muslim Terrorist and Christian Terrorist but all from the right. Ya the anarchist go around break glass and generally cause mischief...but unless I am missing something this hasn't happened since we were kids.
sanepride said @ 5:07pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
Gonna be a lot of political finger-pointing and self-examining over this. Really the only thing we need to know is that violent assholes will be assholes regardless of their political leanings, and the current polarized, angry climate fosters a perfect breeding ground for this kind of thing.
What we don't need is to be lectured about this by Steve King, whose history of divisive, blatantly racist statements makes him part of the problem.
bbqkink said[1] @ 5:31pm GMT on 14th Jun
Ya something happened several weeks ago to make this guy snap. They said he had the police called several weeks ago because he was taking target practice in his back yard...what ever happened shortly be this will turn out to be the cause...it was pretty obvious political.

As far as the right wing nut balls...just need to remind them about glass houses...and as far as Steve King and Louie Gohmert .... singing lalalalala seems to help
sanepride said @ 5:40pm GMT on 14th Jun
Singing lalalala isn't so effective now that guys like King have attained greater acceptance and legitimacy.
If certain people want to blame political divisiveness for this incident, it would help if they at least have the self-awareness to recognize their own role in it.
C18H27NO3 said @ 5:32pm GMT on 14th Jun
At some point, violence is necessary. You don't have to be an asshole to engage in it if your life is being threatened.

I kind of expected this sooner or later.

Psychopaths that don't give a shit about anything don't need a political ideology to commit murder and destruction.

I'll also say that if you play with fire(tyranny and despotism) you are bound to get burned.
sanepride said @ 5:36pm GMT on 14th Jun
So are you suggesting we might be at that point?
C18H27NO3 said @ 7:39pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
Not yet, but if the current state of affairs continues. . .

I'm just saying that at some point protests and media outrage won't accomplish anything. Especially when people feel helpless and without representation in government. The party in control gives zero fucks about what the opposition thinks. Because that's mostly how this is going down.

Conservatives want to eliminate liberalism. Period. It's not about compromise and collaboration. That went out the window 40 years ago. One party has almost total control, and and seems to be not only changing the way government works but access to it as well, and changing the culture to boot. So much so that people's lives are affected across all demographics. In a matter of months.

Slow change usually tempers violence. We are not experiencing slow change.
hellboy said @ 8:04pm GMT on 14th Jun
If the Mueller investigation fizzles, if the Dems fail to re-take the House next year, if Congress continues to shrug at the Dumpster Fuhrer's misbehavior... they've already started the movement to re-write the Constitution by having state legislatures bypass Congress.

There's a clear pattern in history: when a minority takes power and exploits that power for their own benefit at the expense of their fellow citizens, it's only a matter of time before those not in power storm the castle with pitchforks and torches. They have no choice, it's a matter of survival. This is why the Republican strategy of No Compromise will ultimately destroy the country.
LacheChance said @ 6:52pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
The Weather Underground arose in a time when Nixon was stealing documents to win the Presidential election, the National Guard was shooting students, and "organizing whites against their own perceived oppression" were "attempts by whites to carve out even more privilege than they already derive from the imperialist nexus".
So yeah, the left does start to arm-up when things get bad enough, I think you're right that it may be happening again. It's sad to think that the 90s may have been the only period of peace I'll see in my lifetime.
bbqkink said @ 7:00pm GMT on 14th Jun
As I was there for the first time...and split from the organization because of it I know it can happen.I don't see this as that yet. I am betting on a much more personal reason. something happened in this man life beyond Trump getting elected.
LacheChance said @ 7:14pm GMT on 14th Jun
Definitely, I didn't mean to suggest an organization was behind this particular incident. I was just being a fatalist and predicting more extremism in the future.
bbqkink said @ 7:49pm GMT on 14th Jun
Well ya extremism grows in a ghetto.
sanepride said @ 7:17pm GMT on 14th Jun
Maybe we're seeing the beginnings of something like this in the more militant, confrontational Antifa movement but this shooting seems (so far) to be the work of a lone actor with a personal history of violence.
King Of The Hill said @ 10:38pm GMT on 14th Jun
James Von Brunn was essentially a liberal
Andrew Joseph Stack was essentially a liberal
Aaron Alexis was a liberal
Jerad and Amanda Miller were supporters of the Occupy movement.
Craig Hicks was a liberal
Jared Lee Loughner
.....

All of those are labelled as right wing, yet they all can be classified as liberal/progressive or at the least gov't haters with no specific "party" idealistic BS. One was an Obama supporter.

So yeah, there have been plenty of left leaning terrorist shootings in the last several years.



bbqkink said[1] @ 10:54pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:2]
Von Brunn was a white supremacist and Holocaust denier

Andrew Joseph Stack was an anti government capitalist

Aaron Alexis was a mentally ill contractor.....he had "taken apart his bed, believing someone was hiding under it, and observed that Alexis had taped a microphone to the ceiling to record the voices of people that were following him"

Jerad and Amanda Miller were crazed killers their killings were nowhere near political...

Craig Hicks was an anti Muslim not exactly liberal

Jared Lee Loughner shot Gabby Giffords for fucks sake who has been warping your mind with this shit ?

Records show that Loughner was registered as an Independent and voted in 2006 and 2008, but not in 2010.[39][40]

Loughner's high-school friend Zach Osler said, "He did not watch TV; he disliked the news; he didn't listen to political radio; he didn't take sides; he wasn't on the Left; he wasn't on the Right.
sanepride said @ 11:16pm GMT on 14th Jun
Also Jerad Miller was an anti-government Obama hater.
Hicks if anything was an anti-religion libertarian.
And Loughner was a nutcase with no coherent ideology.
sanepride said @ 12:43am GMT on 15th Jun
C'mon dude you're not an idiot- it's not like it's hard to look this stuff up.
Tell you what, I'll give you Oswald, he was a full-blown commie. Never mind that he shot a center-left president.
hellboy said @ 7:18pm GMT on 14th Jun
Gingrich and some asshole from WI named Kremer are making similar statements.
kylemcbitch said @ 3:54pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
What needs be said:

I know not yet what his reason is, but whatever it is, fuck him and anyone carrying water for him. As far as I am concerned, today the shooting victims are not Republican, Democrat, or any sort of partisan.

They are Americans. Americans who spend their time and life in service to us all. I wish them a speedy recovery.

What should be said:

Donald Trump moved on this quickly, as he should have. If only I could count on him to do the same for other such attacks like in Oregon.

A gun stopped this. (But also started this.)

The Obvious:

I expect that presidential approval will rise to 45%+ for about a week. Congressional approval (currently 11%) will probably break 20%.
Bleb said @ 4:01pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:4 Insightful]
A gun stopped this

It wasn't a "good guy" with a concealed carry that stopped this. Law enforcement's gun stopped this, which is how it's supposed to work.
King Of The Hill said @ 4:38pm GMT on 14th Jun
Yep... and we all walk around with tax payer funded congressional security teams while out practicing baseball.

The reality is, the police were no where near the scene as it was happening.

Think about that.

Secondly, I'm a CCW permit holder, but even I know I wouldn't be playing baseball and carrying a weapon at the same time.... So anyone's point that CCW would have saved the day here is moot.
sanepride said @ 4:48pm GMT on 14th Jun
As House Majority Whip Rep. Scalise has a round-the-clock security detail, so in fact Capitol Police were on the scene as it was happening.
I'll also point out that Virginia has among the most permissive gun laws in the country, including open carry w/o a permit- which if anything probably benefited the shooter.
King Of The Hill said @ 5:19pm GMT on 14th Jun
No...

You missed my point entirely. They had a security detail with them. Any other ball field with ordinary people would not have a security detail there with the specific intent to protect them. They would have had to rely on the local police which likely would not have been parked right there at the ball field. It is also likely that their security detail was plain clothes.

My point stands.

Secondly... Open carry is fucking moot here. It was a rifle, not a handgun.

...or are you just trying to argue for the sake of it because it's me?
sanepride said @ 5:33pm GMT on 14th Jun
Maybe I don't know what your point is. That we can't rely on law enforcement is such situations? If so, I'd just point out how exceedingly rare such situations actually are.
arrowhen said @ 6:43pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
"FEAR BAD! GUNS GOOD!" Don't overthink it.
sanepride said @ 7:20pm GMT on 14th Jun
Yup. When it comes down to all the most ardent defenses of the 2nd Amendment (at least as it's currently interpreted), this is really what it boils down to.
midden said @ 9:52pm GMT on 14th Jun
FEAR GOOD because lead to MORE GUNS!!!
King Of The Hill said @ 10:17pm GMT on 14th Jun
Bleb said this...

"It wasn't a "good guy" with a concealed carry that stopped this. Law enforcement's gun stopped this, which is how it's supposed to work."

Now do you understand my point? Law enforcement didn't stop this... least not in the traditional sense of what we consider law enforcement. Nobody had to call 911...as these politicians travel around with a security detail.
sanepride said @ 10:39pm GMT on 14th Jun
Still don't see your point. These guys were targeted specifically because of who they are, so of course there was a security detail- two plainclothes Capitol Police officers, both of whom were apparently wounded in the melee. WaPo reports local police arriving 'within minutes'. It's not even clear whether it was the security detail or local cops that got the shooter. But even if there wasn't the security detail the local cops likely would have gotten him.
Here's the obligatory cellphone video- you can hear the sirens around 1:30 after the shots start, by 2:00 you can hear arriving police yelling "stay down!"
'Stay down!' Video shows gunfire at baseball practice
King Of The Hill said @ 6:50am GMT on 15th Jun
"WaPo reports local police arriving 'within minutes'."

Yep... Minutes. Think about that. It probably also helps that the capital police detail had radios. Based on interviews of the congress critters it was the security detail that got him.
Fish said @ 10:22pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:-1 Boring]
Wait, I thought America was a lunatic gun range and all we have to do is take the guns away and we'd all be safe.

That *used* to be your condescending/pontificating position.

For the record

– The shooter was a resident of Illinois, which has restrictive gun laws (not Virginia)
– The shooter had a permit
– The shooter passed a background check (and it looks like he slipped through the cracks with a criminal conviction– oops!)
– The shooter was an ardent *Progressive*

In other words, he didn't fit the official Sanepride (Mad?) profile of a gun nut being white, conservative, anti-government, etc ad nauseum (not that they ever do).

This guy was a full on Bernie Bro with a boner (ick) for that Maddow fella

As we know, gun laws only work for people who follow those laws (and by extension, criminals don't follow laws)

– Because of Virginia's gun laws, he was at greater risk of return fire in VA than he would have been had he carried out his attack a few miles up the road
– The NYT helpfully pointed out where the Congressmen practiced and how to spot the Secret Service https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/6h93yg/ny_times_tipped_off_shooter_in_april_article/

You can pretend all you want about 'right wing violence', but the people agitating in the streets, supressing free speech and (now) shooting Congressmen are all Progressives.

I can't wait til the Russia 'probe' collapses (it already has) and Trump will be on the road to 2020.

Then what?

Fish said @ 2:38am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:-2 Boring]
Oh look, the Washington Post is trying to get the Bernie Bro shooter off the front page by claiming Mueller is after Trump for obstruction.

Put money on it: Fake News.
bbqkink said[1] @ 6:57pm GMT on 14th Jun
you all seem to insinuate that having a gun with you makes you safer when all statics show just the opposite. The rule of thumb that seems to be the most on target is . The more guns in a ANY certain area equals more dead and injured.

The fact that now people can conceal the fact that are carrying a firearm is different than it was before, but only slightly....admittedly now a few more people do carry but it has always been done permit or no. The claim that it is a deterrent to crime seems doubtful especially in circumstances like this one.

So if the rule of thumb holds there are a few more guns in more places that should equal a few more dead people but it is still to early to tell.
cb361 said[1] @ 7:37pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
Variations on the "It takes a good guy with a gun to stop a bad guy with a gun" argument is all that you'll get from any gun advocate. Period. The fact that all evidence shows that the more guns there are in general circulation, the more bloodshed you'll get, just can't stand up to that emotive and self-serving attitude. In my time on SE I have gone from confusion that people can be so stupid, to anger that people can be so stupid, to sad resignation that there is no point arguing with stupid people. Especially the intelligent ones who aren't quite intelligent enough to appreciate their own stupidity.
arrowhen said @ 9:36pm GMT on 14th Jun
Guns are to gun advocates like alcohol is to Homer Simpson: the cause of and solution to all of life's problems.
rylex said @ 3:15am GMT on 15th Jun
also the best times you'll never remember!
King Of The Hill said @ 10:15pm GMT on 14th Jun
Just in case you didn't bother to read what I had wrote in this same thread above and in advance of your response...

"Yep... and we all walk around with tax payer funded congressional security teams while out practicing baseball.

The reality is, the police were no where near the scene as it was happening.

Think about that.

Secondly, I'm a CCW permit holder, but even I know I wouldn't be playing baseball and carrying a weapon at the same time.... So anyone's point that CCW would have saved the day here is moot."
bbqkink said @ 10:39pm GMT on 14th Jun
Maybe I miss read your statement. The cops aren't generally there before the shooting starts , but the aren't that far away either. My point is it is never an advantage for public safety to have more guns anywhere.
RokDragon said @ 4:31pm GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Informative]
Not many shootings last more than a couple of minutes, which is more than enough time for a shit ton of rounds to be fired before the police get there.

Of course, in the town where I work, the idea of police arriving is more of a wish than anything. Best case scenario, the closest LE officer is more than 15 miles away and then you have to worry if they'll decide to show up at all. In other words, a significant amount of civilians rely on carry of firearms for their ONLY means of defense.
bbqkink said[2] @ 5:34pm GMT on 15th Jun
That is another thing that most gun safety folks forget. There are place in the US you need a gun. My point remains that the more guns the higher the risk of danger. In many cases from your own weapon. It is a decision everyone needs to make for themselves...but don't be fooled into thinking there is no risk, even in a isolated place.

The closer the weapon is ready to fire the more danger it presents, locked in cabinet, trigger lock, unloaded, safety on.... is safer but less able to be called any kind of home defense...the more ready to fire the more likely it is to be picked up by a kid, someone in a domestic fight, or someone coming in late and mistaken for an intruder....or the most common cause of death by gun...suicide.
sanepride said @ 11:04pm GMT on 14th Jun
The presence of the security detail didn't prevent the shooting. At best they helped mitigate a worse outcome.
foobar said @ 2:39am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:2 Underrated]
That's an excellent argument against allowing random yahoos to own guns.
tigsnort said @ 4:40pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:2]
Also, Republicans will guilt the media into becoming more subservient, pulling back on criticisms of Trump.
C18H27NO3 said @ 5:01pm GMT on 14th Jun
Sorry. I cannot agree with this at all. They are not "americans" despite the flag on their lapels. They are not spending time and life in service to all. They are in service to their ideology, and want to impose that upon us by any means necessary. Even if it means millions lose their lives or become bankrupt and destitute, they don't care. They don't represent me. In fact, they are trying to get rid of me and those like me.

I can feel compassion for the loss of life. For the effect it has on survivors. For the effect it has on society when hate and violence is the only recourse. By legitimizing the compassion, it rationalizes their actions. Just like a bully won't stop until they get punched in the mouth. They get no compassion from me. /shrug.
tigsnort said @ 4:37pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
My first thought was "they're gonna use this to milk the persecution angle for all it's worth"
hellboy said @ 7:24pm GMT on 14th Jun
I wonder which Republican will be the first to argue that Mueller should drop his investigation because of this incident.
knumbknutz said[2] @ 4:39pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:3 Insightful]
When you take away everything people have, and then come after their retirement and health coverage, all while popping champagne corks in celebration at the WH rose garden, people just aren't going to react to that very well.
hellboy said[1] @ 7:32pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:3 Underrated]
Senator Rand Paul on Twitter:

".@Judgenap: Why do we have a Second Amendment? It's not to shoot deer. It's to shoot at the government when it becomes tyrannical!"
maximumtodd said @ 10:53pm GMT on 14th Jun
There's a reason Homeland Security has been stockpiling ammo.
Bob Denver said @ 5:07pm GMT on 14th Jun
Ummm...is no-one going to point out that the congressman posthumously fat-shamed that liberal gunman? /sarc
ComposerNate said @ 7:08pm GMT on 14th Jun
Will something positive come from this?
hellboy said @ 7:14pm GMT on 14th Jun
Gun stocks are up already, so check your portfolio.
HoZay said @ 8:39pm GMT on 14th Jun
No.
maximumtodd said @ 10:47pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]
We've gotten to the point where you can't even shoot at a Congressman without hitting a lobbyist.
3333 said[1] @ 11:14pm GMT on 14th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]

Politics engenders fierce loyalties on both sides of the isle, and strong passions amongst the sane, and the mentally unstable. As such, it is almost inevitable that things like this will happen, irrespective of the political stripe of the affected parties. Yet one cannot read this thread in good faith, and with a clear eye, and not see numerous comments that, while not defending this crime per se, seek to minimize, diminish, and rationalize it.


sanepride said @ 11:23pm GMT on 14th Jun
Damn, too bad this comment started out so promising.
Yet I cannot read it in good faith, and with a clear eye, and not see a highly biased, whiny viewpoint.
3333 said[1] @ 11:29pm GMT on 14th Jun

Do you think I am imagining tepid condemnation of this act in this thread?

kylemcbitch said @ 12:40am GMT on 15th Jun
For what little it's worth, I have to agree.

Sorry. I cannot agree with this at all. They are not "americans" despite the flag on their lapels.

Yes they are, even if I disagree with them.
C18H27NO3 said[1] @ 2:29pm GMT on 15th Jun
I guess in the same way the Nazi Party did everything for ALL germans, right? Or the communist party worked for ALL russians, or those within the USSR.
kylemcbitch said[2] @ 3:30pm GMT on 15th Jun
You are barking up the wrong tree, as I am someone who will tell you that the German people have a hell of a lot more responsibility for the Holocaust than people tend to historically attribute to them. Hitler may have rose to power on the strength of 35%, but he held on to it precisely because his position was popular.

An American soldier with deeply held religious convictions that lead him or her to volunteer so they might get a chance to shoot at muslims is wrong in all the same ways as the muslim that does the same. Though you must take the whole picture. That solider is part of a larger body, with more philosophical input than themselves. While that soldier might individually be wrong-headed, their service to that larger idea still stands. Which is why when I run into such people, I tell them they are fuckheads, but still generally thank them for the service all the same.

I don't agree with the man's politics, but I am not about to claim he didn't put his time and effort into trying to represent the views and opinions of the people he is elected to do so for. A politician is not there to serve MY views, they are they to serve the views of their constituents. The general idea being that somewhere in the giant chaotic mess of opinions, what is right or needed eventually comes to the surface.

At the end of the day, we are *not* a direct democracy. Our representatives are not only allowed to ignore us, they are encouraged to do so (two wolves and a well-armed lamb, anyone?) If and when we have a fundamental problem with that, it's our job to vote them out.

I do not have to agree with this person to understand his role.
sanepride said @ 12:45am GMT on 15th Jun
Considering that this is not a crowd generally given to overwrought outrage and condemnation, yeah.
3333 said @ 1:01am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Insightful]



“The left does start to arm-up when things get bad enough.”

“At some point, violence is necessary.”

“They are not "americans" despite the flag on their lapels.”

“They get no compassion from me.”

“I'll say if you play with fire you are bound to get burned.”

“There's a reason Homeland Security has been stockpiling ammo”

“At some point protests and media outrage won't accomplish anything.”

“It's only a matter of time before those not in power storm the castle with pitchforks and torches.”

sanepride said @ 2:52am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
Seems like a mostly reasonable compilation of analysis and observations about how the situation got to where it is (not sure about the DHS stockpiling ammo one). None of these necessarily preclude condemnation of the act or sympathy for the victims.

And then there's this-
“I’ve never seen hatred like this, to me, they’re not even people." -Eric Trump
sanepride said @ 3:02am GMT on 15th Jun [Score:1 Underrated]
But then again, I see the right is already playing the full-blown victim card over this. Oh nos! Bloodthirsty liberals are hunting us like sheep!
So, in spite of my general inclination to foster dialogue and promote the better angels, fuck you snowflake.
Menchi said @ 2:42am GMT on 15th Jun
"it is almost inevitable that things like this will happen"

http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131
bbqkink said @ 4:33am GMT on 15th Jun

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.



Posts of Import
Secret Santa 2016 🎅
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
Mentions - Beta
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings
arrowhen
XregnaR
sanepride
HoZay
lilmookieesquire