|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
United States24800 Posts
On June 29 2018 00:47 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On June 28 2018 11:28 micronesia wrote:On June 28 2018 11:19 ShambhalaWar wrote:On June 27 2018 19:55 micronesia wrote:
ShambhalaWar, don't forget that this conversation we are having here started when you quoted someone, said all I've heard you say is, "don't take all our guns," and added nobody is saying that. The post you quoted did not include "don't take our guns." It was an understandable response to ridiculous hyperbole about how folks with conservative gun values think the solution is more guns, even to problems like the refrigerator not working. The person originally quoted was doing exactly what you are accusing conservatives of right now and stifling discussion. You can't reasonably try to moral high ground here about pointless technical tangents given that lead-up to this discussion. And yes, notable people, and people in this thread even, have called for total gun bans, in the past, so it's not some hypothetical.
When you see cases where people are pretending someone argued for a total gun ban, when they did not, call that out if you want to, and actually quote that post, and make your point about how a political technique commonly used by American conservatives is being used to prevent real discussion. Don't call out posts that aren't actually like that then argue to the death when people point out you aren't being reasonable. I could care less about moral high ground, Although it doesn't seem that way, if true then that's commendable. and a discussion doesn't include points that aren't based in the shared reality. Nobody in leadership positions are calling for a ban on all guns, therefore the position is irrelevant. You moved the goal posts. The question was whether or not people were calling for a total gun ban... not whether or not people in leadership positions are calling for a total gun ban. You can make the point that it's more important to talk about what the leaders are saying, but that doesn't make what you originally said correct. However, the person occupying the white house suggested arming teachers with guns as a legitimate answer to the MSD high school massacre. Which is relevant to our discussion because...? Hyperbole is appropriate when the solutions proposed for a mass murder are that fucking stupid. This only serves as evidence that you, presumably a representative of the left on this issue, are not willing to have a reasonable discussion on this topic and support others who say stupid things to drive away people who don't agree with you on the issue. At least own up to it. In a thread about school shootings Which this thread is not, specifically. it's pointless to rail on and on about someone taking away the gun rights of all Americans. You can easily make the argument my original objection is pointless despite being technically correct. I would have bowed out a while ago if you did. It's not even part of the discussion, to say it is... is flatly untrue. As previously demonstrated, my original objection was based on truth rather than falsehood. Importance you can argue, not accuracy. It's only a real discussion in the mind of alex jones and people that dilute their minds with his false reality. It's the equivalent of coming in here and saying "sandy hook was faked, just like the moon landing." I don't appreciate being told my objection to your falsehoods puts me in the same category as Alex Jones who is nuts or obvious conspiracy theories about Sandy Hook or the moon landing. You are doubling down on use of hyperbola to drive away the person that disagrees with you. As I said, just own up to it. You don't give a crap what people who don't totally agree with you think, and just want to pontificate your thoughts into this thread. You're only legitimate point is that someone at some point in time said, "we should ban all guns." That, does not in any way make it a legitimate part of this discussion"
"It's just something conservatives say when their point is otherwise indefensible in light of the killing that results from America's gun problem. I never said the call for banning all guns came exclusively from people who are on the right on this issue, nor did I need to. What you need to do, and I am almost 100% sure you won't, is take a step back and think about what you are actually trying to accomplish here. Based on your actions, the only conclusion I can draw is that you are trying to drive me, someone who wants to see various gun-related reforms that will place common sense restrictions on gun usage, further to the right. Perhaps the conservatives in this thread will that much further emboldened to completely write you off as well... but it's pretty clear you don't give a crap about that either. "it's pointless to rail on and on about someone taking away the gun rights of all Americans" "You can easily make the argument my original objection is pointless despite being technically correct. I would have bowed out a while ago if you did." I'm sorry I couldn't word it so well... That's been my point this whole time. Maybe you could just spell it out in 1 or 2 sentences, what has been your point of making a comment on my post? You wanted to say I was technically wrong about a statement that is 99% right? Also, I can't drive you any farther to the right than I can make someone like danglers view of the world less myopic. We can discuss something, but this isn't really a discussion, it's only about being "right." Same with danglers, he just has a view point he is clinging too and will probably never let go of because it serves his world view. If you want to have a discussion with me you need to bring more than just poking technical holes in my words, communication isn't so 1 dimensional as reading exactly what is written and calling it's god's truth. The bible for example. While I thought I had clearly conceded your technical point a couple posts ago, clearly it wasn't receive. I changed my view to the vast majority already... yet... if you are getting hung up on that you are also missing the large amounts of truth in my technically false statement. I'm angry... that I live in a country where young children can get mass murdered and we do NOTHING about it.... NOTHING. 60 dead and 250 people wounded in vegas, lives changed forever... people can't walk again... facial disfigurations... workers that get shot in the arm and maybe it fucks up their career for life (if you don't die your not news worthy) for going to a fucking country concert and we can't even ban bump stocks... You should be livid, disgusted by what's going on... if you're not, then your not paying attention.
I agree, it is rather disgusting. My point is that it's not only the right that is contributing to this stalemate, even if they are the primary 'culprits.' When you tell someone you strongly disagree with they are wrong, when they are right and what you really meant is they are focusing on a pointless thing rather than an important/relevant thing, it isn't helping. I owe you an apology for basically assuming that you wouldn't be at all self-reflective in your next post. I won't reiterate all the points I've made in this thread in the past about changes I would like to see (e.g., actually ban bump stocks), but we likely want to see similar things.
|
Apparently the guy had burned his fingerprints or something to make it harder to identify him so, most likely a terrorist act.
|
Suspect in Deadly Capital Gazette Shooting Had 'Vendetta,' Was ID'd With Facial Recognition Software: Authorities
Five people have died and several others are "gravely injured" after a shooting Thursday at the Capital Gazette newspaper building in Annapolis, Maryland, local and federal officials say.
The names of the dead were not released immediately.
The suspected shooter is 38-year-old Jarrod Ramos, three senior law enforcement officials briefed on the matter told NBC News. Anne Arundel County police declined to provide the suspect's name.
The suspect threatened the community newspaper on social media, police department spokesman Lt. Ryan Frashure said in a briefing Thursay night.
"This individual had some type of vendetta against the Capital newspaper, and they were specifically targeted," Frashure said.
The suspect is in custody, and authorities are interrogating him, officials said.
NBC
Initial reporting suggests a personal vendetta.
Ramos had unsuccessfully sued the newspaper and one of its former reporters in 2012 for defamation.
Daily Mail
|
On June 29 2018 10:09 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +Suspect in Deadly Capital Gazette Shooting Had 'Vendetta,' Was ID'd With Facial Recognition Software: Authorities
Five people have died and several others are "gravely injured" after a shooting Thursday at the Capital Gazette newspaper building in Annapolis, Maryland, local and federal officials say.
The names of the dead were not released immediately.
The suspected shooter is 38-year-old Jarrod Ramos, three senior law enforcement officials briefed on the matter told NBC News. Anne Arundel County police declined to provide the suspect's name.
The suspect threatened the community newspaper on social media, police department spokesman Lt. Ryan Frashure said in a briefing Thursay night.
"This individual had some type of vendetta against the Capital newspaper, and they were specifically targeted," Frashure said.
The suspect is in custody, and authorities are interrogating him, officials said. NBCInitial reporting suggests a personal vendetta. Show nested quote +Ramos had unsuccessfully sued the newspaper and one of its former reporters in 2012 for defamation. Daily Mail
Probably an incel
Ramos pleaded guilty to criminal harassment in July 2011. Five days later, an article about the case appeared in The Capital, one of Capital Gazette's publications. The story detailed accusations by a woman who said Ramos harassed her online and off for months, calling her employer and trying to get her fired. The woman eventually went to the police and Ramos pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of harassment in 2011.
www.cbsnews.com
|
These folks alway have a history of abuse and often domestic violence. This guy is going to be no different.
|
I can't imagine the backlash on reddit if they still had the incel subreddit. Incels arn't rational people anymore they're worse then the nazis when it comes to hate. Not even on women but functioning men as well.
|
United States44323 Posts
On June 30 2018 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
I can't imagine the backlash on reddit if they still had the incel subreddit. Incels arn't rational people anymore they're worse then the nazis when it comes to hate. Not even on women but functioning men as well.
Pretty sure Nazis are worse than incels.
|
On June 30 2018 09:35 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2018 08:59 Sermokala wrote:
I can't imagine the backlash on reddit if they still had the incel subreddit. Incels arn't rational people anymore they're worse then the nazis when it comes to hate. Not even on women but functioning men as well. Pretty sure Nazis are worse than incels.
When it comes to mass shootings recently it's fairly close, there's quite a bit of overlap between those communities though. Not that incels are nazi level racist, but more being an open nazi greatly reduces your dating pool.
|
Nazism also has a distinct flavor of misogyny along with its racial motivated animus. It’s obessions with the idolized white male body and superior genes. It a culture of ethenic purity, women only have value a way to breed better stock.
|
On June 30 2018 10:03 Plansix wrote:
Nazism also has a distinct flavor of misogyny along with its racial motivated animus. It’s obessions with the idolized white male body and superior genes. It a culture of ethenic purity, women only have value a way to breed better stock.
Comparing 1940's Germany to the crowds at a typical white supremacy gathering seems to indicate they've already peaked in that regard.
|
On June 30 2018 10:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 30 2018 10:03 Plansix wrote:
Nazism also has a distinct flavor of misogyny along with its racial motivated animus. It’s obessions with the idolized white male body and superior genes. It a culture of ethenic purity, women only have value a way to breed better stock. Comparing 1940's Germany to the crowds at a typical white supremacy gathering seems to indicate they've already peaked in that regard.
Nazi Germany had a cinima savant as the head of their propaganda machine. She made them look like the superior race on film and photograph. The reality of the Nazi regime is that it was filled with losers who failed everything the majority of their life. There were hints of genius, but the vast majority of the Nazi government, all the way to the top was filled with incompetent boot lickers who would turn on each other for a promotion.
So the incel community has a lot in common with the Nazis.
|
Incels are ridiculous but they should be seen as threat individually. They hate everyone except incels so you're bound to get the absolute worst kind of people joining up.
|
Maybe they will rebrand and join law enforcement like the skin heads did? Have no doubt, they will find a way to convert that rage into tangible malice. Groups like incels are dangerous. Before the name they were just random people who hated women. Now they are a group with common rage. At some point they will be something else.
|
On June 18 2018 16:30 evilfatsh1t wrote:
yeah sadly for people like danglar or sst, it would take an actual family member to be a victim of completely random gun violence. only then (i hope), would they see that a person dying for absolutely no reason other than the government letting people wield lethal weapons for "muh rights", is absolutely ludicrous.
if it aint a loved one then "its not my problem. its fine if other people die because itll never happen to me, but dont take away my rights"
I told myself that I wouldn't respond to this nonsensical thread anymore, but since you posted something so absolutely inflammatory directly at me, I am going to with a very simple post.
The fact that you even mentioning some sort of physical harm to anyone's personal family members at all is an absolutely disgusting, abhorrent, and extremely insensitive post. The fact that you are mentioning it in a political context makes you a complete jackass of epic proportions. Not once have I, Danglers, or any other guns rights supporters have ever posted anything like this. We merely defend our points whether we believe in them or not, and whether you believe our arguments to be strong enough is your opinion.
Never in a million years would I ever emotional grandstand and try and even mention the personal safety of someone's family for any kind of political reason, internet or not. It's common sense to debate the points of an argument. It's human decency not to mention the safety of someone's personal family into an argument, especially in the way you put it, as though you were wishing death upon one of our family members to get us to change our political views. It is disgusting, insulting, and absolutely unacceptable for anyone to post in this kind of manner. You can kindly go and piss off.
Disagreeing with me, calling me an idiot, etc. Is one thing. Essentially wishing death on someone's personal family is a completely different story.
|
On June 29 2018 06:35 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On June 29 2018 06:32 GreenHorizons wrote:On June 29 2018 06:27 Plansix wrote:On June 29 2018 05:07 Nebuchad wrote:
Can't access the coverage from Europe :/
Unsettling timing with Milo's statement about journalists, but the thesis of suicidal/workplace issue is always more likely. Milo just posted something saying the media will blame it on him because they don't understand what trolling is. The dude is a walking abuse of oxygen. I don't think either you or Milo are wrong about this. He is likely right. But the response consisted entirely of him covering his ass, just in case. Nothing about the victims of the shooting. The dude is shit stain and a blight on mankind.
I apologise on behalf of England, by the way. I'd thought our exports bottomed out with Piers Morgan but Milo went significantly lower.
On July 01 2018 17:47 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2018 16:30 evilfatsh1t wrote:
yeah sadly for people like danglar or sst, it would take an actual family member to be a victim of completely random gun violence. only then (i hope), would they see that a person dying for absolutely no reason other than the government letting people wield lethal weapons for "muh rights", is absolutely ludicrous.
if it aint a loved one then "its not my problem. its fine if other people die because itll never happen to me, but dont take away my rights" Disagreeing with me, calling me an idiot, etc. Is one thing. Essentially wishing death on someone's personal family is a completely different story.
He didn't wish death on someone's family. Read his post slowly and try again. Otherwise you are in fact emotionally grandstanding, the one thing you said you weren't going to do.
|
Superstartran, I have read every page of this thread, as well as a few other threads on here relating to politics. They are very long, but fascinating.
Every time someone tells you, or danglars (see page 741), or anyone else that you guys don't care when people die...  Whether they insinuate it, or just flat-out say it, it hurts me to imagine what it's like for ya'll.
I understand completely why u don't post in this thread anymore.
To other posters, I will simply say: You are not saving any lives by making enemies of your "opposition," who are in reality members of our own online community. Nor are you changing any minds. It is much better, although much more difficult, to grit your teeth and make friends out of them. It's also much more cunning.
I know ya'll are hurting over the lives that have already been lost; do it for the ones that could be saved.
|
On July 01 2018 20:10 itsnotevenbutter wrote:
I know ya'll are hurting over the lives that have already been lost; do it for the ones that could be saved.
You mean, by banning firearms I suppose ?
|
On July 01 2018 20:39 Furikawari wrote:Show nested quote +On July 01 2018 20:10 itsnotevenbutter wrote:
I know ya'll are hurting over the lives that have already been lost; do it for the ones that could be saved.
You mean, by banning firearms I suppose ?
And another one goes straight for the banning straw man. Do we have to go through this discussion every single time? Almost no one wants to ban all firearms, but most wants some kind of regulation. Attempting to go into the extreme in either direction is non productive.
|
On July 01 2018 17:47 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2018 16:30 evilfatsh1t wrote:
yeah sadly for people like danglar or sst, it would take an actual family member to be a victim of completely random gun violence. only then (i hope), would they see that a person dying for absolutely no reason other than the government letting people wield lethal weapons for "muh rights", is absolutely ludicrous.
if it aint a loved one then "its not my problem. its fine if other people die because itll never happen to me, but dont take away my rights" I told myself that I wouldn't respond to this nonsensical thread anymore, but since you posted something so absolutely inflammatory directly at me, I am going to with a very simple post. The fact that you even mentioning some sort of physical harm to anyone's personal family members at all is an absolutely disgusting, abhorrent, and extremely insensitive post. The fact that you are mentioning it in a political context makes you a complete jackass of epic proportions. Not once have I, Danglers, or any other guns rights supporters have ever posted anything like this. We merely defend our points whether we believe in them or not, and whether you believe our arguments to be strong enough is your opinion. Never in a million years would I ever emotional grandstand and try and even mention the personal safety of someone's family for any kind of political reason, internet or not. It's common sense to debate the points of an argument. It's human decency not to mention the safety of someone's personal family into an argument, especially in the way you put it, as though you were wishing death upon one of our family members to get us to change our political views. It is disgusting, insulting, and absolutely unacceptable for anyone to post in this kind of manner. You can kindly go and piss off. Disagreeing with me, calling me an idiot, etc. Is one thing. Essentially wishing death on someone's personal family is a completely different story.
your post is pretty much all the evidence anyone in this thread needs to realise you dont know wtf youre talking about lol.
not once did i wish anything onto anyone. i said for people like you, an event like what i described would be what it takes for you to see the idiocy of your own opinions. believe it or not i am debating the points of your arguments.
you guys believe that your rights to own firearms take precedence over others' right to safety (cutting through the crap). you can try and sugarcoat your arguments and present them so that it appears these rights dont infringe on each other much but there are many who would disagree with you, especially those that have already been victim to senseless firearm casualties. me stating that it seems such an event would be what it takes for you to realise the nonsense in your own arguments does not insinuate that i wish death upon any of your family members. not even close lol
|
On July 01 2018 20:10 itsnotevenbutter wrote:Superstartran, I have read every page of this thread, as well as a few other threads on here relating to politics. They are very long, but fascinating. Every time someone tells you, or danglars (see page 741), or anyone else that you guys don't care when people die... Whether they insinuate it, or just flat-out say it, it hurts me to imagine what it's like for ya'll. I understand completely why u don't post in this thread anymore. To other posters, I will simply say: You are not saving any lives by making enemies of your "opposition," who are in reality members of our own online community. Nor are you changing any minds. It is much better, although much more difficult, to grit your teeth and make friends out of them. It's also much more cunning. I know ya'll are hurting over the lives that have already been lost; do it for the ones that could be saved.
that is indeed more effective; but it also requires pretending that people that did a bad thing didn't do a bad thing; it requires not calling out misbehavior. which carries consequences of its own.
I wish you luck in your stratagem, and your sympathy looks like it may be very effective, but it's not one I can follow.
we didn't "make" them enemies, they chose to be that all on their own.
startran not posting wouldn't be a loss to the thread, he didn't add value to it anyways. I can understand him not wanting to post; but it's a result of him making bad posts in the first place and getting called out on them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
