# US experiences two more mass shootings in less than 24 hours; 8chan's founder calls for site closure



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

The first shooting occurred in a Wal-Mart located in El Paso, Texas, leaving 20 dead and at least 24 others injured in just six minutes before the police arrived.  After it was revealed that the shooter posted an anti-immigrant manifesto on 8chan just prior to committing this act of terrorism, 8chan's founder called for the site to be shut down.  This is the third shooter this year to post something similar on the site.  While I certainly don't believe 8chan bears a majority of the responsibility, the unmoderated nature of the site does make it vulnerable to becoming part of a larger radicalization pipeline on the internet.  There are separate conversations to be had about gun control and the rise of white supremacist terrorism in the US, and you're free to discuss those things here, but my thoughts are that the topic of 8chan might prove a bit less redundant.

The second shooting occurred in an entertainment district of Dayton, Ohio, leaving 9 dead and 27 injured in a mere thirty seconds before a police officer shot and killed the perpetrator.  The gunman had two drum magazines with at least 100 rounds of ammo, and he was wearing a ballistic vest, mask, and protective ear muffs.  The gunman's sister was among those killed, and the motive behind this shooting is not yet clear.

In 216 days of 2019, the US has now seen 251 mass shootings.  Seems like our thoughts and prayers have lost all effect, assuming they had any effect to begin with.


----------



## total_n000000b (Aug 5, 2019)

These terrorists have nothing good to do on their hands, yes terrorists.

Do not come with me bullshit about them being mentally sick! Because if a Black man or a Muslim were to commit it would be because of their race and not other mental problems or gang violence or Sharia agenda.

There clearly is a white nationalist movement going on because Trump gave them rise to the power. They have agendas, they want their way of life to be enforced. Their mentality is based upon that we are controlled by Jews and freedom from.that is mass shooting. These are clearly characteristics portrayed by terrorists.


----------



## Captain_N (Aug 5, 2019)

I can just hear the politics now. both sides rushing to gain politically. 
A lot of good calling for small magazine sizes. Im sure he was not supposed to have a drum mag, but criminals dont follow the law. Restricting the mag size is not the answer. Getting rid if all guns wont help. The criminals will still have them. 
The only answer i can come up with is nothing short of science fiction: Time travel/ The minority report. It seems we have to have knowledge of future events so stop it.
I sure wish i had a time machine. Id stop it.


----------



## MohammedQ8 (Aug 5, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> I can just hear the politics now. both sides rushing to gain politically.
> A lot of good calling for small magazine sizes. Im sure he was not supposed to have a drum mag, but criminals dont follow the law. Restricting the mag size is not the answer. Getting rid if all guns wont help. The criminals will still have them.
> The only answer i can come up with is nothing short of science fiction: Time travel/ The minority report. It seems we have to have knowledge of future events so stop it.
> I sure wish i had a time machine. Id stop it.


What if you went back in time and they killed you instead?


----------



## Captain_N (Aug 5, 2019)

Mohammed2935 said:


> What if you went back in time and they killed you instead?



lol i new this was coming. I think just being there id violate the temporal prime directive.


----------



## GhostLatte (Aug 5, 2019)

It was truly saddening to wake up to this today. It is time for action now, not thoughts and prayers.


----------



## DBlaze (Aug 5, 2019)

But banning guns or regulating them is still not the solution ofcourse.
Just get more guns to defend yourself from gun users :^)


----------



## Nerdtendo (Aug 5, 2019)

I saw this on the news today and it breaks my heart. There is no excuse for gross people like this. Say what you will about gun control, racism, political climate, or whatever social commentary presented by these events, it doesn't matter. This world is dark and is getting darker. I am ready for the end which I hope is sooner than later. I'm an optimistic guy but this is getting to be too much.


----------



## total_n000000b (Aug 5, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> I can just hear the politics now. both sides rushing to gain politically.
> A lot of good calling for small magazine sizes. Im sure he was not supposed to have a drum mag, but criminals dont follow the law. Restricting the mag size is not the answer. Getting rid if all guns wont help. The criminals will still have them.
> The only answer i can come up with is nothing short of science fiction: Time travel/ The minority report. It seems we have to have knowledge of future events so stop it.
> I sure wish i had a time machine. Id stop it.


At least there should be some sort of identification system. Anyone who buys a gun or owns one should be on a registry. Mass purchase of bullets and or weaponry on that Identification can trigger shooter warning.

Gun should be equipped with RFID chips, and huge array of sensors should be added to the entrances of public places.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

Captain_N said:


> A lot of good calling for small magazine sizes. Im sure he was not supposed to have a drum mag, but criminals dont follow the law.


So you're an anarchist, then?  Why have any laws at all if criminals are going to ignore them?

The reality is that we don't create laws with the expectation that criminals are going to follow them.  We create laws to catch criminals (hopefully preemptively, but usually in the act) and punish them accordingly.  In this particular case, you'd at least have online and retail stores (who do follow the law) cease all sales of large magazines, making them that much less accessible.  That's a start, but at a minimum, I also believe we need universal background checks and nationwide red flag laws.  People with a history of mental health issues and/or a history of domestic violence cannot be trusted with the responsibility of gun ownership.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

total_n000000b said:


> At least there should be some sort of identification system. Anyone who buys a gun or owns one should be on a registry. Mass purchase of bullets and or weaponry on that Identification can trigger shooter warning.
> 
> Gun should be equipped with RFID chips, and huge array of sensors should be added to the entrances of public places.


Counting ammunition would do nothing.  Plenty of people shoot for sport.  Are you going to throw all those people on a list to surveil? Gun identification sorta does exist, some states mandate it.  That doesn't stop criminals from acquiring them.  

As for the RFID and sensor arrays, I'd prefer the US to not become as big brother as China currently is.  All paths are leading towards big brother surveillance state.  We don't need to speed it up.  We don't need police to pre-emptively prevent a crime every time they "think" it might happen.  It's a huge waste of resources and leads down the slippery slope of thought policing.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

This topic just disgusts me at this point. Some people think that the solution is thoughts and prayers. 


AbyssalMonkey said:


> Counting ammunition would do nothing.  Plenty of people shoot for sport.  Are you going to throw all those people on a list to surveil? Gun identification sorta does exist, some states mandate it.  That doesn't stop criminals from acquiring them.
> 
> As for the RFID and sensor arrays, I'd prefer the US to not become as big brother as China currently is.  All paths are leading towards big brother surveillance state.  We don't need to speed it up.  We don't need police to pre-emptively prevent a crime every time they "think" it might happen.  It's a huge waste of resources and leads down the slippery slope of thought policing.




while i understand the sentiment, do you propose nothing be done? I really dont have any suggestions anyways. Nuance in this topic is nonexistent. people either want to have a batallion or no weapons. To be fair though the NRA poisoned this topic a long time ago.


----------



## MohammedQ8 (Aug 5, 2019)

total_n000000b said:


> Judging by your name you are from middle east or Indian subcontinent right? Mind you they are not heaven on Earth either.


I know in the end of any religion is dependent on the person believing or not. If you are built in bad no matter what I teach you, you are still bad.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



Mohammed2935 said:


> I know in the end of any religion is dependent on the person believing or not. If you are built in bad no matter what I teach you, you are still bad.



Religions are just clothes to wear actually.


----------



## Nerdtendo (Aug 5, 2019)

Mohammed2935 said:


> I know in the end of any religion is dependent on the person believing or not. If you are built in bad no matter what I teach you, you are still bad.
> 
> --------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
> 
> ...


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> This topic just disgusts me at this point. Some people think that the solution is just to
> 
> 
> 
> while i understand the sentiment, do you propose nothing be done? I really dont have any suggestions anyways. Nuance in this topic is nonexistent. people either want to have a batallion or no weapons. To be fair though the NRA poisoned this topic a long time ago.


I think some sanity measures should be in place.  Like obviously no rocket launchers and artillery.  Beyond that, gun control doesn't serve much purpose.  Most of the gun crimes committed in the US are by small weapons. People are being led around like sheep about this issue because we have mass shootings which make up a grand minority of the criminal violence.

Instead of trying to control guns, it would be far more effective to solve the socioeconomic issues that cause the violence in the first place.  If goods exist, there are ways to acquire them.  As far as I'm concerned, a submachine gun is just as deadly as shrapnel grenades which can be made with off the shelf ingredients in just about any first world country.  The problem the US has is the agenda of the media and the governments willful ignorance to solve the issues and instead ignore their constituents to line their own pockets with money.

These attacks are only going to continue to happen as the toxicity of politics ramps up and the game turns into a me vs you instead of us vs the problem.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Great content, keep up the good work!  Some great thoughts here.


----------



## total_n000000b (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> Counting ammunition would do nothing.  Plenty of people shoot for sport.  Are you going to throw all those people on a list to surveil? Gun identification sorta does exist, some states mandate it.  That doesn't stop criminals from acquiring them.
> 
> As for the RFID and sensor arrays, I'd prefer the US to not become as big brother as China currently is.  All paths are leading towards big brother surveillance state.  We don't need to speed it up.  We don't need police to pre-emptively prevent a crime every time they "think" it might happen.  It's a huge waste of resources and leads down the slippery slope of thought policing.



It does not stop them from acquiring but it does warn higher authorities! Like if you are to buy a bag of ammunition for no reason then you must be question. People who play sport should be supplied ammo by their shooting range.

I don't think it is very big brother esque to for the gun to have it's date of purchase, store of purchase and a warning signal that I am here.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> I think some sanity measures should be in place.  Like obviously no rocket launchers and artillery.  Beyond that, gun control doesn't serve much purpose.  Most of the gun crimes committed in the US are by small weapons. People are being led around like sheep about this issue because we have mass shootings which make up a grand minority of the criminal violence.
> 
> Instead of trying to control guns, it would be far more effective to solve the socioeconomic issues that cause the violence in the first place.  If goods exist, there are ways to acquire them.  As far as I'm concerned, a submachine gun is just as deadly as shrapnel grenades which can be made with off the shelf ingredients in just about any first world country.  The problem the US has is the agenda of the media and the governments willful ignorance to solve the issues and instead ignore their constituents to line their own pockets with money.
> 
> .


My only issue with this, is that you just advocated for the status quo. Which begs the question are you ok with the way things are.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> My only issue with this, is that you just advocated for the status quo. Which begs the question are you ok with the way things are.


Because the status quo on actual control is fine.  Gun control does not need to advance. Period. Full stop.

I'm advocating for the solution of the problem to the socioeconomics that cause these issues.  You can point at a symptom and try to solve it all you want. Treating the symptom does not cure the disease.  Anyone advocating that we need more gun control is ignoring the larger picture and focusing on one sector.  



total_n000000b said:


> It does not stop them from acquiring but it does warn higher authorities! Like if you are to buy a bag of ammunition for no reason then you must be question. People who play sport should be supplied ammo by their shooting range.
> 
> I don't think it is very big brother esque to for the gun to have it's date of purchase, store of purchase and a warning signal that I am here.


Succinctly stated: "I fear the gun more than I fear the person."  What's the next end game?  Say we ban guns altogether.  Do you think that will solve the violence problem?  It doesn't.  It simply pushes the people who would be prone to it to use other methods.  My favorite guess as to what that would be are cars.  They have the ability to be just as deadly and just about anyone can acquire one.

You don't solve violence by taking the tool away. You solve it by routing the reason it exists.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

well other countries have done it and gun violence plumetted. I am not saying thats the solution here but it has worked.
as for whole socio economic problem... Some of the nuts that have done this seem to be pretty well off in comparison to other people in this country. We are gonna blame poverty for mass shootings now?


----------



## DANTENDO (Aug 5, 2019)

They say America greatest country on earth do me a favour ther an embarasment - thers no need for anyone to hav a gun ther only needed if a country go's to war and for military only


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 5, 2019)

total_n000000b said:


> These terrorists have nothing good to do on their hands, yes terrorists.
> 
> Do not come with me bullshit about them being mentally sick! Because if a Black man or a Muslim were to commit it would be because of their race and not other mental problems or gang violence or Sharia agenda.
> 
> ...


Nice try, except the second shooter was none of these things and was basically you guys instead.

Connor Betts: Twitter Posts on Being a Leftist, Guns


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> Because the status quo on actual control is fine.  Gun control does not need to advance. Period. Full stop.


Nonsense, we don't even have universal background checks in place, and that's something that people of both parties agree should be implemented.



AbyssalMonkey said:


> I'm advocating for the solution of the problem to the socioeconomics that cause these issues.  You can point at a symptom and try to solve it all you want. Treating the symptom does not cure the disease.  Anyone advocating that we need more gun control is ignoring the larger picture and focusing on one sector.


Poverty and mental illness are both problems that need to be addressed in this country, I don't think anyone is denying that.  The fact that it's easier to gain access to guns than to get help with either of these problems makes the situation that much more volatile, however.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> well other countries have done it and gun violence plumetted. I am not saying thats the solution here but it has worked.
> as for whole socio economic problem... Some of the nuts that have done this seem to be pretty well off in comparison to other people in this country. We are gonna blame poverty for mass shootings now?


"We took away guns and gun violence plummeted".  Great.  You just moved the goal post to another sector of violence.  Guns don't create violence, people create violence.  Guns are a convenient tool used to express that violence.  All removing guns would do is shuffle the problem under the rug where you can't see it anymore.

Poverty isn't the only cause of violence.  Many other factors are at play here. I even alluded to one in my second post.


AbyssalMonkey said:


> These attacks are only going to continue to happen as the toxicity of politics ramps up and the game turns into a me vs you instead of us vs the problem.


If you think the end game of politics to secure power isn't to divide and conquer, which is exactly what is happening, I don't know how to better express it than to ask for you to look through history.  Power has always been secured by demonizing one sector of the population and deeming them the enemy.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> "We took away guns and gun violence plummeted".  Great.  You just moved the goal post to another sector of violence.  Guns don't create violence, people create violence.  Guns are a convenient tool used to express that violence.  All removing guns would do is shuffle the problem under the rug where you can't see it anymore.
> .


Like i said Nuance is gone on this topic. 

in many similar threads i have said how i understand how some people may need something to protect themselves. However when said thing is capable of mowing down people by the dozens, and people going "dont take them away, they will just find another way to do it" seems like they are moving the goalpost themselves. it just boils down to said folks being ok with said tragedies happening over and over and over again.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> Like i said Nuance is gone on this topic.
> 
> in many similar threads i have said how i understand how some people may need something to protect themselves. However when said thing is capable of mowing down people by the dozens, and people going "dont take them away, they will just find another way to do it" seems like they are moving the goalpost themselves. it just boils down to said folks being ok with said tragedies happening over and over and over again.


If the only goal is to stop gun violence because people aren't happy with this specific type of tragedy happening, sure, removing guns solves that problem de facto.  However, that doesn't solve the problem.  It's ultimate form of shifting the goal post by simply rebranding it, neglecting to mention that these events will simply happen elsewhere.  Generalization is different that goal post shifting.  By pointing out that guns are a symptom, I am pointing out the specification that the topic has reached and the fact that a larger topic is being discussed by proxy of a subtopic.


----------



## DBlaze (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> If the only goal is to stop gun violence because people aren't happy with this specific type of tragedy happening, sure, removing guns solves that problem de facto.  However, that doesn't solve the problem.  It's ultimate form of shifting the goal post by simply rebranding it, neglecting to mention that these events will simply happen elsewhere.  Generalization is different that goal post shifting.  By pointing out that guns are a symptom, I am pointing out the specification that the topic has reached and the fact that a larger topic is being discussed by proxy of a subtopic.


By your logic you may as well wipe out humanity, because there's always a reason to hate, you can't satisfy all sides, world peace will never happen.
Humans are the cause, weapons are a means to an end, if you want to solve the problem by the root, you remove the root.

Truth is that guns make it a hell of a lot more easier to kill a large amount of people, your reasoning that they would just shift to other means is true, but you're standing by it way too strongly in saying "taking away guns won't solve the problem". Problem solving isn't always a simple as taking 1 step and hope it's done. 
People will aways find means to kill people, but you can at least make it less easy.


----------



## AbyssalMonkey (Aug 5, 2019)

DBlaze said:


> By your logic you may as well wipe out humanity, because there's always a reason to hate, you can't satisfy all sides, world peace will never happen.
> Humans are the cause, weapons are a means to an end, if you want to solve the problem by the root, you remove the root.
> 
> Truth is that guns make it a hell of a lot more easier to kill a large amount of people, your reasoning that they would just shift to other means is true, but you're standing by it way too strongly in saying "taking away guns won't solve the problem". Problem solving isn't always a simple as taking 1 step and hope it's done.
> People will aways find means to kill people, but you can at least make it less easy.


I firmly believe that guns don't make it easier to kill someone than any other tool.  I believe the perception that they have gained has caused people to make them their go to choice for committing such acts.  By taking them away, you are encouraging people to seek out other methods to express their hate.  

I said in a different post, mass shootings are only a small fraction of the crimes committed by the use of guns.  People only focus on them so much because of the optics that they gather.  It's distracting them from other, potentially worse, crimes or methods that would stand to see a gain by the simple removal of the tool.


----------



## Technicmaster0 (Aug 5, 2019)

Taking guns away would sure help. It would make the entry barrier much higher (because you would need to try to find a gun on the black market first) and that might stop many people who do this in affect. Sure, you can kill people with other things but they are far less effective, many people less would be killed. Having a gun makes it way too easy.
Sure, you can build grenade-like weapons on your own. But again, the barrier to do so (finding instructions, getting the stuff etc) is much higher.

Having strict gun control helps. Many other countries show that - sure, there are also shootings but far less. Having an argument about something that is proven to work doesn't make sense.


----------



## SparkyX1 (Aug 5, 2019)

DBlaze said:


> By your logic you may as well wipe out humanity, because there's always a reason to hate, you can't satisfy all sides, world peace will never happen.
> Humans are the cause, weapons are a means to an end, if you want to solve the problem by the root, you remove the root.
> 
> Truth is that guns make it a hell of a lot more easier to kill a large amount of people, your reasoning that they would just shift to other means is true, but you're standing by it way too strongly in saying "taking away guns won't solve the problem". Problem solving isn't always a simple as taking 1 step and hope it's done.
> People will aways find means to kill people, but you can at least make it less easy.



Might as well put speed-bumps every 1/2 mile on every road because it would help slow down drunk drivers... While we are at it, ban restaurants, it will help slow down obesity...


----------



## DANTENDO (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> I firmly believe that guns don't make it easier to kill someone than any other tool.


One of the most stupid comments I've ever heard


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> So you're an anarchist, then?  Why have any laws at all if criminals are going to ignore them?
> 
> The reality is that we don't create laws with the expectation that criminals are going to follow them.  We create laws to catch criminals (hopefully preemptively, but usually in the act) and punish them accordingly.  In this particular case, you'd at least have online and retail stores (who do follow the law) cease all sales of large magazines, making them that much less accessible.  That's a start, but at a minimum, I also believe we need universal background checks and nationwide red flag laws.  People with a history of mental health issues and/or a history of domestic violence cannot be trusted with the responsibility of gun ownership.




Laws used to be a method to guide people to a harmonious existence as a society.  Law enforcement was a byproduct of that.  Tyranny is a byproduct of that.

We don't call it "gun violence" when a government threatens its own people with a militia that's armed with guns.

It's a perpetual cycle where the strongest gunmen reign.

The root of gun violence is in our political nature, arrogantly believing that we can control others.  It sets up the conditions where people try to rise above that control and decide this:



GhostLatte said:


> It was truly saddening to wake up to this today. It is time for action now, not thoughts and prayers.


----------



## SparkyX1 (Aug 5, 2019)

DANTENDO said:


> One of the most stupid comments I've ever heard



You realize that it is much easier, faster, and quieter to kill with an object such as a knife? It isn't a stupid comment. It is only stupid to ignore such ideas and pretend like society is a fantasy where guns are the only malicious tool.


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

0reo said:


> You realize that it is much easier, faster, and quieter to kill with an object such as a knife? It isn't a stupid comment. It is only stupid to ignore such ideas and pretend like society is a fantasy where guns are the only malicious tool.


let me know when a knife can mow down  34 people at once.


----------



## SparkyX1 (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> let me know when a knife can mow down a 34 people at once.



Never claimed that. Fallacies are weak arguments.


----------



## DBlaze (Aug 5, 2019)

AbyssalMonkey said:


> I firmly believe that guns don't make it easier to kill someone than any other tool.  I believe the perception that they have gained has caused people to make them their go to choice for committing such acts.  By taking them away, you are encouraging people to seek out other methods to express their hate.
> 
> I said in a different post, mass shootings are only a small fraction of the crimes committed by the use of guns.  People only focus on them so much because of the optics that they gather.  It's distracting them from other, potentially worse, crimes or methods that would stand to see a gain by the simple removal of the tool.


Nice way to avoid the entire point.
You don't believe guns make it easier to kill? I said it makes it easier to kill a lot in a short amount of time. You can't do the same amount of damage with a knife in the same amount of time as you can with a gun, unless you're some kind of literal kinetic knife throwing ninja.

And the other person with the moot arguments on drunk drivers and restaurants, those are completely seperate issues, what is your point besides bringing up almost literal food analogy?


----------



## GhostLatte (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> Laws used to be a method to guide people to a harmonious existence as a society.  Law enforcement was a byproduct of that.  Tyranny is a byproduct of that.
> 
> We don't call it "gun violence" when a government threatens its own people with a militia that's armed with guns.
> 
> ...


I don’t know who you were replying to but laws are needed within a nation. You ever see the Purge?


----------



## WD_GASTER2 (Aug 5, 2019)

0reo said:


> Never claimed that. Fallacies are weak arguments.


what fallacy? the point is that a knife cant lead to 34 people being killed immediately, yes you can probably beat someone to death with a spoon if you really tried but to compare it to something that can run down people by the dozens is absurd.


----------



## DANTENDO (Aug 5, 2019)

0reo said:


> You realize that it is much easier, faster, and quieter to kill with an object such as a knife? It isn't a stupid comment. It is only stupid to ignore such ideas and pretend like society is a fantasy where guns are the only malicious tool.


Another stupid comment so yr telling me tht guy who killed over 70 people in america from a hotel room down below in a crowd would of killed more with a knife - laughable mate


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

GhostLatte said:


> I don’t know who you were replying to but laws are needed within a nation. You ever see the Purge?



If you are replying to me, I suggest that you read what I said, and to who I said it to.  I quoted who I was replying to in the very beginning.  If you want to say something that relates to what I said, I'm listening.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> The root of gun violence is in our political nature, arrogantly believing that we can control others.


I'm not so sure about that.  Other countries' governments exert more control over their citizens than the US government does, and those countries still have far fewer gun murders/suicides annually.  I think the US populace has a unique obsession with firearms rooted in history, and we've been in a sort of nebulous hatred trance since 9/11 and the beginnings of the war on terror.  With no clearly defined enemy or objective, we're turning our weapons on each other, and committing the same acts of terrorism we once sought to eliminate from the Middle East.  A "live by the sword, die by the sword" situation if ever there was one.

Of course, it also doesn't help one bit that certain political leaders have built their entire identities around stoking the flames of hatred and division.  Insufferable as I think she is, I'd still gladly settle for a Marianne Williamson presidency if the whole nation took her message of peace, love, and healing crystals to heart.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Other countries' governments exert more control over their citizens than the US government does



And, as I said, with an armed militia.

Blaming anyone other than the shooter promotes the mindset for potential shooters to think "It's not my fault" before they go out and kill.  Gun violence occurs on both sides of the political spectrum and it is a struggle for control.  America, too, is the greatest place for the "I'm the victim" mentality.

If you want to blame Trump for everything, go ahead.  All of these problems existed way before him.  Good luck with your healing crystals.


----------



## Viri (Aug 5, 2019)

Hey, I get to post this again!



Spoiler


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> And, as I said, with an armed militia who got into power by gun violence.


Not all, no.  America is far from the only country with democratically elected leadership.



tabzer said:


> Blaming anyone other than the shooter promotes the mindset for potential shooters to think "It's not my fault" before they go out and kill.  Gun violence occurs on both sides of the political spectrum and it is a struggle for control.  America, too, is the greatest place for the "I'm the victim" mentality.


We agree on that, and I wasn't explicitly blaming the environment for the shooters' actions, only pointing out some contributing factors. 



tabzer said:


> If you want to blame Trump for everything, go ahead.  All of these problems existed way before him.


I didn't mention anybody by name, and in the US we certainly have had political leaders which built their identities around stoking hatred and division well before Trump did it.  Again, not the root cause, just another contributing factor that shooters can attribute their actions to.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Not all, no. America is far from the only country with democratically elected leadership.



That "exert more control" with an armed militia.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> That "exert more control" with an armed militia.


This is kind of circular logic though.  If exerting more control via the military/police leads to less or no mass shootings in other countries, why doesn't it have the same effect in the US?  For that matter, there are plenty examples of countries where the opposite is true too: the laws and government controls are far more lax than the US', and there's still far less gun violence.  It all comes back to the fact that America has a unique history and culture revolving around guns.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> This is kind of circular logic though.



That's what I said with my post about it being a cycle.



Xzi said:


> why doesn't it have the same effect in the US?



Other countries, who as you said, exert more control, already has their gun gang established on top threatening any "uprise".  America, with it's very open clash between multiple ideologies gives merit to the idea that the "revolution" is open season. 

Anyway, our conversation is stupid in light of what @Viri posted.  I feel kind of embarrassed that I am "contributing" to your "amazing" post.



Viri said:


> Hey, I get to post this again!
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


----------



## Clydefrosch (Aug 5, 2019)

Meanwhile, despite being populated by nazi descendants and supposedly invaded by at least a billion sharia law loving extremists a week, there have been  no mass shootings in Germany.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> That's what I said with my post about it being a cycle.


A cycle unique to the US, unfortunately.  Other countries have a fair amount of violence to contend with, they just don't have the gun obsession in the mix.



tabzer said:


> Anyway, our conversation is stupid in light of what @Viri posted.  I feel kind of embarrassed that I am "contributing" to your "amazing" post.


You said it yourself: blaming anyone but the shooter for their actions is ridiculous.  Other countries have similar media coverage and haven't seen the same trend that we have.  It might be one of several contributing factors to the epidemic of mass shootings growing ever more frequent, but it's far from the only factor.


----------



## deinonychus71 (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> what fallacy? the point is that a knife cant lead to 34 people being killed immediately, yes you can probably beat someone to death with a spoon if you really tried but to compare it to something that can run down people by the dozens is absurd.


I'd love an answer to this as well... someday, from anyone who still pretends it would change nothing.

US politics have no balls to do what needs to be done. Why bother fighting the oil industry or the gun industry, let's talk about immigration and promote violence instead, non-stop.
Let's all talk again in 50+ years when the planet will be inhabitable cause some fucking lobbies will have blocked any sort of progress towards more eco-friendly technologies and when we'll have a new series of worldwide wars due to constantly pointing fingers at others.

Someone sent me this today 
https://twitter.com/tarekobagi/status/1157911327505076224


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> A cycle unique to the US



Wrong.  War existed before the US did, and before guns there were daggers and arrows.  If you want to suggest that gun violence is the only type of violence that we *should focus on, then you aren't interested in finding the root of the actual problem.



Xzi said:


> You said it yourself: blaming anyone but the shooter for their actions is ridiculous.





Xzi said:


> only pointing out some contributing factors.



I am saying that @Viri posted something more insightful and relevant than either of us have.  This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful.  The value I see in it is as a work of satire.


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> what fallacy? the point is that a knife cant lead to 34 people being killed immediately, yes you can probably beat someone to death with a spoon if you really tried but to compare it to something that can run down people by the dozens is absurd.


You mean like a truck?


----------



## RaptorDMG (Aug 5, 2019)

Glyptofane said:


> You mean like a truck?


At least with a truck you have the chance to see and hear it coming and attempt to avoid it


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> Wrong.  War existed before the US did, and before guns there were daggers and arrows.


Well no shit.  This thread isn't about bronze age problems.



tabzer said:


> If you want to suggest that gun violence is the only type of violence that we suggest, then you aren't interested in finding the root of the actual problem.


The problem in its simplest form is tribalism, but that exists everywhere in the world.  Mass shootings of this frequency only happen in the US.



tabzer said:


> I am saying that Viri posted something more insightful and relevant than either of us have. This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful.  The value I see in it is as a work of satire.


The idea presented in the video Viri posted is nothing new or unique.  What you choose to attribute value to is your business, but the fact that you find amusement in tragedies just makes you a dick.


----------



## Subtle Demise (Aug 5, 2019)

WD_GASTER2 said:


> well other countries have done it and gun violence plumetted. I am not saying thats the solution here but it has worked.
> as for whole socio economic problem... Some of the nuts that have done this seem to be pretty well off in comparison to other people in this country. We are gonna blame poverty for mass shootings now?


Gun violence plummeted. Yeah that's obvious. What about vans plowing people over, knife crime, acid attacks? You can destroy a lot of property and kill way more people with gasoline, styrofoam and a thickening agent. Take up metalworking and machining and fashion a makeshift flamethrower and cause even more destruction. People kill people. Nothing you can do about that.


----------



## kuwanger (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> We create laws to catch criminals (hopefully preemptively, but usually in the act) and punish them accordingly.



Except that even though multiple shooters have had long rants on 8chan, they weren't preemptively caught.  Why?  Because the steps of defining things as illegal doesn't really seem to work.  Smaller magazine sizes?  Buy more.  Stricter rules on guns?  Keep shopping around until the background check says you're good--how many shooters have gotten their gun legally through a background check?  There's some talk about adding juvenile mental health records?  No idea if that'd change things.  Well, how about just punishing people for making hateful, unspecific, threatening rants?  That's about the only thing really left to try to preemptive arrest most people, but that could be said to undermine most free speech--#metoo was hateful, often unspecific, and generally threatening.

Btw, I'm not arguing any of the above wouldn't have *some* effect.  It's just pretty clear that there's no simple panacea when guns and bulletproof vests are available and people are motivated to do harm towards others.  It seems clear that luck has more to do with catching a person than anything.  Do I bring up the horrible arson attack in Japan?  There's a lot of things we could try to regulate to prevent all sorts of attacks, but it's clearly cultural sentiment that drives these things.  Look at the anarchists in the US 110 years ago.  Look at the complaints at the time.  Mass shootings are so shocking because we don't expect them and we view them as unacceptable.  A product defects that brings down a plane?  Well, that's just a cost of doing business.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> the fact that you find amusement in tragedies just makes you a dick.



I was talking about your thread, not about what actually happened.  Conflating the two makes you a dick.  Do you hope to be on CNN or Fox news in the future, Mr. Contributor?


----------



## DRAGONBALLVINTAGE (Aug 5, 2019)

Trump Blaming Video Games

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...nce-today-a9040066.html?utm_source=reddit.com


----------



## Subtle Demise (Aug 5, 2019)

DRAGONBALLVINTAGE said:


> Trump Blaming Video Games
> 
> https://www.independent.co.uk/life-...nce-today-a9040066.html?utm_source=reddit.com


Of course video games are the scapegoat again, even though there are fewer ultra-violent games being made today than there were back 20+ years ago when they tried that shit last time. Let's blame inanimate objects, let's blame violent media, let's blame music, let's blame websites. God forbid we should admit that there are evil people in this world that either want to commit suicide by cop and take as many innocents with them as possible. Or they are motivated by extremely misguided racial and/or religious beliefs.



DANTENDO said:


> They say America greatest country on earth do me a favour ther an embarasment - thers no need for anyone to hav a gun ther only needed if a country go's to war and for military only


In the last 100 years, victims of democide (government sanctioned murder) were estimated to be around 250,000,000 in number. Many times these governments target their own people, and the US government is no exception. In fact, they excel at it:

Almost total eradication of the native population
Putting down the Whiskey Rebellion
The federal government instigating the Civil War
Burning men, women, and children alove at Waco, TX
MOVE bombing in Philadelphia. Lots of collateral damage that is still shrugged off to this day
Those are just attacks against our own people. We can't forget about the wars of aggression, constant interventionism, and regional destabilization our military is infamous for. Speaking of military, how about the local police with APCs, fully automatics and full body armor. In many of the big cities, they are more like an occupying army than ones meant to protect and serve. Last year, police shot and killed three times as many people than who died in all the mass shootings combined. Hell, people say Trump is literally hitler and is supporting white supremacy terrorism, right here in this very thread.

So yes, let's trust only these people with guns and let them have a monopoly on violence. It is working so well for us already, why not let them have more? Sorry, but I won't allow it, and many others feel the same way I do. When words like "boogaloo" and "big igloo" (look them up)get thrown around casually on a site as mainstream and public as Facebook, I know something big is coming, and I want to be on the right side of liberty and history.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

kuwanger said:


> Except that even though multiple shooters have had long rants on 8chan, they weren't preemptively caught.  Why?  Because the steps of defining things as illegal doesn't really seem to work.


These things are always posted less than a minute before the shooting starts.  Of course that's not enough time to identify the poster, trace the IP address, etc.



kuwanger said:


> Smaller magazine sizes?  Buy more.


Which means reloading more, giving more chances for people to flee to safety and more opportunities for cops/other civilians with guns to take out the shooter.



kuwanger said:


> Stricter rules on guns?  Keep shopping around until the background check says you're good--how many shooters have gotten their gun legally through a background check?


Background checks aren't going to catch every would-be shooter, but that doesn't mean it should be easy to circumvent them altogether.



kuwanger said:


> There's some talk about adding juvenile mental health records?  No idea if that'd change things.


That's a good idea for background checks.  You should also look up red flag laws, which a couple states have passed already.  They provide a legal avenue to take guns away from individuals who commit violent crimes or have a record of mental illness, therefore being a good way to catch those people who fall through the cracks of a background check.



kuwanger said:


> Well, how about just punishing people for making hateful, unspecific, threatening rants?


The FBI and NSA do follow up on online threats they deem credible, but again, most people that commit acts of terrorism do it just moments after posting manifestos.



kuwanger said:


> Btw, I'm not arguing any of the above wouldn't have *some* effect.  It's just pretty clear that there's no simple panacea when guns and bulletproof vests are available and people are motivated to do harm towards others.  It seems clear that luck has more to do with catching a person than anything.


I agree, no one policy is going to fix everything, but we've tried doing nothing for decades, and at this point I think we can say definitively that sitting on our hands is not helpful.



kuwanger said:


> Do I bring up the horrible arson attack in Japan?  There's a lot of things we could try to regulate to prevent all sorts of attacks, but it's clearly cultural sentiment that drives these things.  Look at the anarchists in the US 110 years ago.  Look at the complaints at the time.  Mass shootings are so shocking because we don't expect them and we view them as unacceptable.  A product defects that brings down a plane?  Well, that's just a cost of doing business.


Violence comes in several forms, yes, but there are laws and contingencies already in place to deal with arson and defective aircraft.  Far more than there are for guns in the US.


----------



## Hanafuda (Aug 5, 2019)

Makes no sense that all of the focus is on 'mass shooting' events. Not only does all the media attention just hype the next psycho incel's dreams of finally getting noticed, but the number of deaths caused by such mass shootings is miniscule compared to actually criminal-related, gang-related, drug-trade related gun violence. 46 people were shot and 7 killed in Chicago over the same weekend these 2 shootings occurred, and nobody blinks. And the difference is that the shootings in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, St.Louis, etc. just keep on the next day, and the next day, etc. It's an inner-city plague perpetrated mostly with shitty "Hi-Point 9mm" pistols, the cheapest of the cheap piece-of-shit handguns (they do function, though). Banning certain types of rifles isn't going to do shit to the overall gun violence situation.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

Hanafuda said:


> Makes no sense that all of the focus is on 'mass shooting' events. Not only does all the media attention just hype the next psycho incel's dreams of finally getting noticed, but the number of deaths caused by such mass shootings is miniscule compared to actually criminal-related, gang-related, drug-trade related gun violence.


It makes total sense.  Usually the victims of the shootings you're talking about are other criminals, gang members, or drug smugglers.  Mass shooters often target people and places randomly and indiscriminately, and people want to know they'll be safe in public, rather than needing to wear a ballistic vest to Wal-Mart or the movie theater.

I like deGrasse Tyson, but as is typical for people with a lot of practical knowledge, he's often lacking in common sense.  We do quite a lot as a society in an attempt to avoid all those other types of unnecessary deaths.  We've done nothing as a nation to address gun violence basically ever, and it's a big contributor to two of the statistics he mentioned.


----------



## Viri (Aug 5, 2019)

Hanafuda said:


> but the number of deaths caused by such mass shootings is miniscule compared to actually criminal-related, gang-related, drug-trade related gun violence. 46 people were shot and 7 killed in Chicago over the same weekend these 2 shootings occurred, and nobody blinks. And the difference is that the shootings in Chicago, Detroit, Baltimore, St.Louis, etc.


Media doesn't care about those types of killings. Also, did you know, in Chicago 1600 people were shot this year alone? There will probably be a mass shooting in one of those cities tonight, but it'll never be reported outside of local news. But, hey, at least we'll get to hear about what school Patrick went to, and hear from Patrick Crusius' first grade school teacher!


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

Viri said:


> Also, did you know, in Chicago 1600 people were shot this year alone? There will probably be a mass shooting in one of those cities tonight, but it'll never be reported outside of local news.


So we can agree that we have a long way to go in addressing gun violence and the causes behind it.  This is not a valid excuse to continue doing nothing.


----------



## Viri (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> So we can agree that we have a long way to go in addressing gun violence and the causes behind it.  This is not a valid excuse to continue doing nothing.


I think the violence in a mass shooting like yesterday felt more like a terrorist attack than what goes on in Chicago, Baltimore, etc. But, I think the media should talk about those cities more. I like to imagine the people in those cities feel hopeless, and that nobody really seems to care that a mass shooting happens nearly every night, yet nobody outside the city gives a shit. The only time the media gives a fuck, is if Trump says a negative thing about the city.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

Viri said:


> I think the violence in a mass shooting like yesterday felt more like a terrorist attack than what goes on in Chicago, Baltimore, etc. But, I think the media should talk about those cities more. I like to imagine the people in those cities feel hopeless, and that nobody really seems to care that a mass shooting happens nearly every night, yet nobody outside the city gives a shit.


The media definitely deserves a share of the blame, but at the same time, they don't have the power to change anything.  Some would say they already cover killings and shootings far too much.  Covering them even more isn't going to compel politicians in the pocket of the NRA to act.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> politicians in the pocket of the NRA to act.



Are you talking about Chicago?


----------



## Glyptofane (Aug 5, 2019)

Xzi said:


> The second shooting occurred in an entertainment district of Dayton, Ohio, leaving 9 dead and 27 injured in a mere thirty seconds before a police officer shot and killed the perpetrator.  The gunman had two drum magazines with at least 100 rounds of ammo, and he was wearing a ballistic vest, mask, and protective ear muffs.  The gunman's sister was among those killed, and the motive behind this shooting is not yet clear.


The motive is unclear because of his victims. His own sister and a bunch of black people kind of goes against his specific and extremist leftist ideology. We do know that he was fantasizing about a violent socialist revolution however. So we know why and what he was preparing for, but not quite what caused him to snap and slaughter his family and allies instead.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 5, 2019)

tabzer said:


> Are you talking about Chicago?


No, I'm talking about nationwide.  Chicago's problems do not occur in a vacuum, and they aren't isolated to the city limits.



Glyptofane said:


> The motive is unclear because of his victims. His own sister and a bunch of black people kind of goes against his specific and extremist leftist ideology. We do know that he was fantasizing about a violent socialist revolution however. So we know why and what he was preparing for, but not quite what caused him to snap and slaughter his family and allies instead.


There is some speculation that the entire shooting was a result of his attempts to control his sister and her dating habits.  It's all still just speculation at this point, however.  He didn't broadcast his motives to the internet beforehand as the El Paso shooter did.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> No, I'm talking about nationwide.  Chicago's problems do not occur in a vacuum, and they aren't isolated within the city limits.


Your response was written to about Chicago's (and Baltimore's) relationship/representation in the media, and then you meandered _jumped to_ politicians being in the NRA's pockets as if there was a direct correlation.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> Your response was written to about what Chicago's (and Baltimore's) relationship/representation in the media, and then you meandered to politicians being in the NRA's pockets as if there was a direct correlation.


There is a direct correlation.  City and state politicians can only do so much in addressing the larger problem of gun violence, and Chicago is far from the only city where it's a major problem.  As stated in the OP, there have been 251 mass shootings in 217 days of 2019.  Since Sandy Hook, there have been over 2100 mass shootings.  We need comprehensive action and legislation on a nationwide scale to address the problem of gun violence, not whataboutisms and attempts to deflect the blame to video games, the media, etc.

If Republicans truly believe mental illness is the primary cause of gun violence, they need to start putting forth some mental healthcare reform bills with national funding to match.  I'm all for that.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

You seem more obsessed with guns than you care about violence.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

And you are using tragedy as an opportunity to stand on a soapbox.


----------



## spotanjo3 (Aug 6, 2019)

Don't be surprised. More will coming in the future. The future is getting much worse and more berserk than ever before!


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> You seem more obsessed with guns than you care about violence.


The nation is obsessed with guns and has been since our founding.  I personally own a couple, but I don't spend any time drooling over them.  There's no debating that between suicides, mass shootings, and singular killings, guns and violence are intertwined heavily in the US.



tabzer said:


> And you are using tragedy as an opportunity to stand on a soapbox.


I have every right to express my opinions on the matter just as you do yours.  I am getting sick of your attempts to start arguments based petty personal attacks, however.  If you hate me and my opinions so much that you can't stick to the topic(s) at hand, you have the option of putting me on ignore or simply not participating in my threads.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> I have every right to express my opinions on the matter just as you do yours.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> I have every right to express my opinions on the matter just as you do yours.


Yes, the matter of gun violence and mass shootings.  Not the matter of how much I unintentionally trigger you.  Reading comprehension is important.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

You aren't triggering me.  I just have opinions about how you post and try to be a copy-cat talking head.  You can try to tell me what I should have opinions on.

You also called me a dick for doing something I didn't do.  Are you going to apologize?




Xzi said:


> Reading comprehension is important.


----------



## leon315 (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Seems like our thoughts and prayers have lost all effect


USA needs to ban the guns, BAN ALL GUNS, and this is the price of LIBERTY and Democracy.

My friend.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

leon315 said:


> USA needs to ban the guns, BAN ALL GUNS, and this is the price of LIBERTY and Democracy.
> 
> My friend.



Straight to the point.  Only if @Xzi opened with this.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> You also called me a dick for doing something I didn't do. Are you going to apologize?


Fuck no, you've only continued to demonstrate more dickishness since then.  If you want YET ANOTHER mud-slinging contest, let's take it to PMs.  It doesn't belong in this thread or any other.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> the fact that you find amusement in tragedies just makes you a dick.



I called this claim out, but maybe you are insisting that you are _this thread is_ the tragedy here.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> I called this claim out, but maybe you are insisting that you are the tragedy here.


All I did was post the news about mass shootings.  You said you view that news as satirical.  How else am I supposed to interpret that?  Your attempts to save face now are just pathetic.  As I said, take it to PMs if you want to keep being a pedantic dickweed.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> You said you view that news as satirical



No I didn't.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

By imagining yourself the center of "that news" is the only way you could interpret it like that.  Conflating "your contribution" (ie thread) with "what happened" as being equal somehow.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> No I didn't.


You sure did, dipshit.  You might've intended to say that you view my opinions as satirical, but you didn't make that clear.  Instead the inference is that you view the breakdown of the news stories (including the number of casualties) as satirical.  Your mask started to slip off a bit there, not that it was covering much of your vile personality to begin with.


----------



## kuwanger (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> Mass shooters often target people and places randomly and indiscriminately, and people want to know they'll be safe in public, rather than needing to wear a ballistic vest to Wal-Mart or the movie theater.



So, we should/do care about the normies and presume everyone else shot isn't an issue?  I mean, if the argument is a lot of homicides are done involving crimes/gangs/drugs, then it's not a matter of "mental health".  It's about criminals committing crimes.  It's clear that most don't put up manifestos of their crimes with hours or days to spare for the police to find out.  Yes, red flags are a good idea, but they're ignored because how many people have red flags?  I'm seriously asking, as the talk of FBI investigating credible threats have definitely lead to just talks with people who have gone on to attempt murder.  It's just not clear to me how we really deal with the problem unless we start mass incarceration based on suspicion, a much larger police force to investigate and interrogate, etc.  Just taking away guns would likely involve this and continue to require it for quite some time after.  I think the result would put the drug war to shame. :/


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> I'd still gladly settle for a Marianne Williamson presidency if the whole nation took her message of peace, love, and healing crystals to heart.





tabzer said:


> This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful. The value I see in it is as a work of satire.





Xzi said:


> dipshit


----------



## UltraDolphinRevolution (Aug 6, 2019)

I can't believe the level of autism spewed by Neil D. Tyson. How about a "right-wing terror is part and parcel of living in a western country" on top of it?
Everyone knows that 20 deaths are technically a small number compared to yearly statistics of various things. You don't need to say it out loud. Especially right after the event. I'm sure the families who are affected are glad to hear it.

Now regarding gun laws: The American populous has shown time and again that they can't handle the current situation. Maybe they work in a small nation in which everyone trusts each other but not in America today. A nation under arms makes sense if a there is a foreign invasion, but the USA is the least likely country to be invaded. These many weapons would make a civil war only worse. There are other ways to dispose of a government without taking up arms (which would be futile anyways - unless you can and do own tanks, rocket launchers, helicopters etc.)

That said the American society seems to be more and more divided so even if there were no guns, people might find other ways like driving trucks into people (s. attacks in mainland Europe) or making bombs (s. Northern Ireland).

Finally, I do not want to promote my (in)famous thread, but if I had to take a guess, both shooters (in El Paso and Dayton) were neither married nor had girlfriends, nor had good job prospects.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful. The value I see in it is as a work of satire.


The OP is almost entirely a breakdown of the facts contained within each of the posted news stories.  The only thing it was meant to contribute is a relaying of that information.  If you want to hurl insults at me, just do it directly instead of hiding behind this 'shoot the messenger' bullshit you're trying to pull.  Own your pettiness.


----------



## chrisrlink (Aug 6, 2019)

I think we should round up these "known" alt right leaders and imprison them free speech my ass when it incites violence it's no longer protected


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> The OP



I didn't mention the OP, but let's talk about the OP...  It's clear from the start of what kind of "news" it wanted to bring onto gbatemp. 

You bring your own thoughts with it in a very ironic statement



Xzi said:


> Seems like our thoughts and prayers have lost all effect, assuming they had any effect to begin with.



As if it is a parody in and of itself.  So insightful!


----------



## D34DL1N3R (Aug 6, 2019)

Xzi said:


> If Republicans truly believe mental illness is the primary cause of gun violence, they need to start putting forth some mental healthcare reform bills with national funding to match.  I'm all for that.



Except they don't truly believe that. They believe it is video games, gay marriages, transsexuals, parents no longer spanking their children, and no Christianity being taught in public schools.


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> "Seems like our thoughts and prayers have lost all effect, assuming they had any effect to begin with."
> 
> As if it is a parody in and of itself.


It's an opinion.  If you think it's a stupid opinion, you should've just said that from the start instead of dancing around the subject.  If you don't want to get called out on being a childish aggro piece of shit, however, it's best if you just steer clear of my threads from now on.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

You have a lot of stupid opinions, but the whole thread is what I was addressing.  It's all talk.  The same talk as before.  Like,"oh yeah! this time we are going to take action".

Not.

I am seeing a lot of red flags about you @Xzi


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

chrisrlink said:


> I think we should round up these "known" alt right leaders and imprison them free speech my ass when it incites violence it's no longer protected


I'm glad the term 'stochastic terrorism' has finally started to work its way into the mainstream consciousness, because it's been happening in plain sight for quite a while now.



D34DL1N3R said:


> Except they don't truly believe that. They believe it is video games, gay marriages, transsexuals, parents no longer spanking their children, and no Christianity being taught in public schools.


True, modern Republican leadership is devoid of all morals and beliefs.  Rather, they'll believe whatever the people cutting a check (in this case the NRA) tell them to believe.



tabzer said:


> You have a lot of stupid opinions, but the whole thread is what I was addressing.  It's all talk.  The same talk as before.  Like,"oh yeah! this time we are going to take action".
> 
> Not.


I've only stated what policy changes I think might be helpful to the larger problem.  I'm not foolish enough to believe that those changes are actually going to happen, especially with Republicans in control of the federal government.  At best we _might_ see some actions taken on a state-by-state level.


----------



## tabzer (Aug 6, 2019)

Are you having trouble reading?  Not only are some of your posts self-defeating and ironic.  I was addressing the whole thread when I said this:




tabzer said:


> This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful. The value I see in it is as a work of satire.



It is very clear that I did not say that I think mass shootings are hilarious.  And then you want to call names and grandstand your self-righteousness.  Seriously.  We can remove guns from violence, but can we remove the @Xzi?


----------



## Xzi (Aug 6, 2019)

tabzer said:


> Are you having trouble reading?


No, but you're definitely having trouble staying consistent.



tabzer said:


> Great content, keep up the good work!  Some great thoughts here.





tabzer said:


> I was addressing the whole thread when I said this:





tabzer said:


> This thread is just a copycat and doesn't contribute anything meaningful. The value I see in it is as a work of satire.


Put down the crack pipe.

Edit: locking this thread as a certain individual can't seem to stay on topic.


----------

