Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here is where you are wrong.
Think about this without emotion. You talk as if you are a gun owner, so I assume you have knowledge of firearms. If killing as many people as possible was your goal what firearm would you use ? This is purely hypothetical. I certainly wouldn't use an AR or an AK. My first choice would be to have 4 Glock 17's. Two in side holsters, two in Velcro holsters on a chest rig. All with 33 round mags. I'd also have a back pack filled with more 33 round mags. This would be FAR more deadly than those evil black rifles. Shots would be fired from both hands, empty the first two, drop them , empty the second two , drop one, then do mag dump after mag dump.
Second choice would be one of the many magazine fed shotguns on the market. Saw the barrel down, a back pack full of magazines and go to town. Again , more deadly than the evil black rifle.
Now if these shooters had MP5's or AR/AK pistols , yeah probably more deadly than the rifle versions.
Fine - then ban them all, would that be preferable? I think that is what you are suggesting is the only solution right?
No one with a brain buys the gunwhack pretzel logic. No matter how many times the drivel is repeated.
I mean, that is just as insane as blaming the president for the shootings.
...oh wait.
Trump’s rhetoric has made him highly vulnerable to criticism. Someone at his rally shouts “ kill them” and he laughs and says “ only in the panhandle”. The crowd shouts “ send them back” and he goes silent for 13 seconds. He waffles on Charlottesville.
He is the so called leader of the free world. His words and reactions serve as inspiration.
He alone chooses the words he speaks and tweets.
He can change his rhetoric. Not just for a day or two with words written by someone else. Forever- going forward. He can take every opportunity to condemn hate, regardless of source, every day.
His base is not going to turn away from him. He can make a positive difference, going forward.
Here is where you are wrong.
Think about this without emotion. You talk as if you are a gun owner, so I assume you have knowledge of firearms. If killing as many people as possible was your goal what firearm would you use ? This is purely hypothetical. I certainly wouldn't use an AR or an AK. My first choice would be to have 4 Glock 17's. Two in side holsters, two in Velcro holsters on a chest rig. All with 33 round mags. I'd also have a back pack filled with more 33 round mags. This would be FAR more deadly than those evil black rifles. Shots would be fired from both hands, empty the first two, drop them , empty the second two , drop one, then do mag dump after mag dump.
Second choice would be one of the many magazine fed shotguns on the market. Saw the barrel down, a back pack full of magazines and go to town. Again , more deadly than the evil black rifle.
Trump’s rhetoric has made him highly vulnerable to criticism. Someone at his rally shouts “ kill them” and he laughs and says “ only in the panhandle”. The crowd shouts “ send them back” and he goes silent for 13 seconds. He waffles on Charlottesville.
He is the so called leader of the free world. His words and reactions serve as inspiration.
He alone chooses the words he speaks and tweets.
He can change his rhetoric. Not just for a day or two with words written by someone else. Forever- going forward. He can take every opportunity to condemn hate, regardless of source, every day.
His base is not going to turn away from him. He can make a positive difference, going forward.
Right he COULD do that but he never will. That's because he is sociopathic - in many ways his weapons are more powerful than the mass shooters. His hate mongering rhetoric has the potential to encourage hundreds of whackos that are on the edge of committing such acts. He will never back away from that because that would involve admission of a fault, and he can never, ever do that. This is the sort of pathetic little man that he is.
Knowledge isn't inherently wrong nor right.... It is what you do with it.
To solve or even discuss a problem, you have to first understand it. Insight into the mind of a killer is one way of understanding a piece of the puzzle. If investigators didn't want to read anything a killer wrote, including a self written manifesto, the crimes quite possibly remain unsolved.
In some discussion threads there are a lot of false assumptions and speculations being made as well as questions being asked that are clearly addressed in the killers writing.
The killers words aren't a threat... Willful ignorance is.
Ex. What better way to object to things like fascism and communism but to read and understand those that implemented them. You do that by reading their texts.
I hate to sound like John McEnroe, but you cannot be serious.
"The killer's writing?" That was not his writing. If you believe that, then you didn't read his inarticulate tweets. It's obvious that he cobbled together parts of someone else's writing(s) to post that manifesto.
Clearly, we can see that he ascribes to those beliefs (pre-Trump, according to him, too), but that screed is no way, no how, the killer's writing.
I'm personally not nearly as worried about "honoring" the idiot shooter by reading his idiot manifesto, as I am worried about how the media (all of it) tries to spin what happened.
We can't fix a problem that we don't understand. Unfortunately this means trying to get inside the head of these lunatics (and yes, it's a scary place).
I read the manifesto before it was even determined to definitely be written or copied or whatever - instigated by - the shooter. Inquiring minds want to know.
I have also read the many tweets and writings and postings by the Dayton shooter. Interesting that these two idiots were apparently on opposite ends of the political spectrum, but both felt as if going on a killing rampage was justified somehow. It's also interesting to me that at least in the case of the Dayton shooter, many people HAD "seen something, said something" and reported him to various authorities - who did next to nothing.
We MUST start doing something differently. One thing that I think would be helpful would be for everyone - starting with our politicians but trickling down to ALL OF US - to quit politicizing these events, quit using them for political agendas and division. Clearly the issue transcends politics. We Americans need to put political agendas aside and find common ground. I believe that the overwhelming majority of Americans are shocked and disgusted by mass shootings and want to prevent them - that's a good starting point.
Last edited by KathrynAragon; 08-05-2019 at 09:00 AM..
Trump’s rhetoric has made him highly vulnerable to criticism. Someone at his rally shouts “ kill them” and he laughs and says “ only in the panhandle”. The crowd shouts “ send them back” and he goes silent for 13 seconds. He waffles on Charlottesville.
He is the so called leader of the free world. His words and reactions serve as inspiration.
He alone chooses the words he speaks and tweets.
He can change his rhetoric. Not just for a day or two with words written by someone else. Forever- going forward. He can take every opportunity to condemn hate, regardless of source, every day.
His base is not going to turn away from him. He can make a positive difference, going forward.
He condemns hate each and every day. He works to help those in inner cities to improve their living conditions and employment status. He, along with his cabinet members, works to stop and prevent child trafficking, pedophilia.
He condemns hate by speaking out against groups like ANTIFA and by not allowing leftist politicians to insult his supporters without speaking against it.
His actions condemn hate. It's just that the leftist anti Trumpers want their version of "condemning hatred" which is actually promoting it.
I don't think you have anything to support that, the "mylife" profile that claims he was a democrat was created AFTER the shooting:
Quote:
Certainly gamesmanship has been afoot with changes being continually made to the suspect’s MyLife entry in the period following the shooting, but not necessarily solely at the hands of “leftists.” It appears the suspect had no profile on MyLife at all until one was created shortly after the El Paso shooting, and that initial profile included no information about his putative political affiliation: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/el...uspect-mylife/
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
