Florida shooting - another white supremacist mass murder

[Frankfooter]

And there is no evidence he targeted any specific group, or killed any specific group.

Add to that his statement after the killings (through his lawyer) that he was extremely remorseful. Whether you believe that or not, it's the not the type of statement a terrorist makes. Terrorists take the opportunity to push their ideology and justify their actions with it. You know, statements like "Allahu Akbar", as the Pulse nightclub shooter shouted.

I'm sure that you think he was a 'really nice guy' like Trump and you defend white supremacists.
We don't know yet for sure if he really was a member of a white supremacist group, only that he was himself a violent, racist, right winger.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/16/us/exclusive-school-shooter-instagram-group/index.html

Meanwhile Trump is now backing arming teachers, his response to meeting with students who wanted gun control.

 

[bver_hunter]

Really now. You know what all right-wingers are thinking at all times??
There are plenty of Righties who want to see a bit more tighter gun restrictions.
Maybe you should stop generalizing, it doesnt make you look very smart

"Generalizing", really??? Okay, look at your quote below, and stop being hypocritical as you are the biggest "generalizer" for making up that statement.

Okay, but please stop lumping all of us into this ridiculous white supremacist bullshit!!!
Enough of that!!!!

So it really does not make you look smart at all, as you made up the above statement.

Obviously, you did not hear the NRA CEO's speech at the CPAC where he was slamming all the Republicans that changed their stance on the gun laws / second amendment and was getting a standing ovation for it.

, and guess what......Rubio is right-wing

Guess what, I complimented Rubio for changing his political stance in spite of the highest contributions from the NRA. You have to go to the new thread that was started, to see my remarks there.

Also not true: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/02/22/trumps-early-move-on-guns-could-bridge-partisan-gap.html

The Fox News had no problem repeatedly showing this right wing conservative student who opposed his fellow colleagues stance on gun controls. I saw the Laura Ingraham show where she agreed with him. There maybe a couple of Fox Show hosts who have changed their views on gun controls including Hannity. But you have to know that Hannity is Trump's personal pet and will blindly suck up to anything that he stands for. Trump is known as the biggest flip flopper, and could be swayed by the NRA to do a 180 degrees on his agreement with the students of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and other schools that were victims of gun violence.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/2...dia-is-using-tragedy-to-push-gun-control.html

 

[basketcase]

And there is no evidence he targeted any specific group, or killed any specific group....

Finally a true statement.

But at the same time, there is clear evidence he was a virulent racist and half of the dead were the very same groups he made violent claims about.

 

[Bud Plug]

Finally a true statement.

But at the same time, there is clear evidence he was a virulent racist and half of the dead were the very same groups he made violent claims about.

Again, you need help with your logic. If the killer was an adamant NASCAR fan, and hated Formula 1 fans with every fiber in his body, and then killed an equal number of NASCAR and Formula 1 loving kids, would that mean that his love of NASCAR explains his actions? Spoiler alert - the logical answer is no. Correlation may not always equal cause, but cause always must bear a correlation to effect.

 

[shack]

Again, you need help with your logic. If the killer was an adamant NASCAR fan, and hated Formula 1 fans with every fiber in his body, and then killed an equal number of NASCAR and Formula 1 loving kids, would that mean that his love of NASCAR explains his actions? Spoiler alert - the logical answer is no. Correlation may not always equal cause, but cause always must bear a correlation to effect.

If he unloaded at an F1 race and there happened to be a bunch of NASCAR fans in attendance, he was still targeting the F1 fans.

 

[oldjones]

Again, you need help with your logic. If the killer was an adamant NASCAR fan, and hated Formula 1 fans with every fiber in his body, and then killed an equal number of NASCAR and Formula 1 loving kids, would that mean that his love of NASCAR explains his actions? Spoiler alert - the logical answer is no. Correlation may not always equal cause, but cause always must bear a correlation to effect.

The real question is what would make anyone think such actions could be explained.

But since we're in your fantasy world, by what means did he distinguish the two types of fans from each other and from ordinary people? Unlike racists, it is well-established that F1-haters have to operate without easy identifiers such as skin colour. But make your hypothetical into CarRace Co-Op T-shirt day and maybe it'd work. Otherwise he'd have to shoot up two different events. And keep score. However, if he had expressed how he hated the way identifiable F1 fans were crowding into one of his NASCAR events and opened fire with the result you describe it might actually parallel the school shooting. But it would make your 'equal' count merely accidental.

But either way, my point still stands: What would make anyone think those actions could be explained? But in your hypothetical and at the school, the shooter is a hater. Guns aren't lovers' tools, they're for haters.

 

[Bud Plug]

If he unloaded at an F1 race and there happened to be a bunch of NASCAR fans in attendance, he was still targeting the F1 fans.

You can't have it both ways. He was a student at this school. He knew the mix of students. He knew who to aim at if his attack was targeted. Oldjones is right on this. It's very difficult to construe a connection between the attitudes of this killer and the targets of his attack. There is still time to drop this course on critical thinking before you get a failing grade!

 

[Bud Plug]

The real question is what would make anyone think such actions could be explained.

But since we're in your fantasy world, by what means did he distinguish the two types of fans from each other and from ordinary people? Unlike racists, it is well-established that F1-haters have to operate without easy identifiers such as skin colour. But make your hypothetical into CarRace Co-Op T-shirt day and maybe it'd work. Otherwise he'd have to shoot up two different events. And keep score. However, if he had expressed how he hated the way identifiable F1 fans were crowding into one of his NASCAR events and opened fire with the result you describe it might actually parallel the school shooting. But it would make your 'equal' count merely accidental.

But either way, my point still stands: What would make anyone think those actions could be explained? But in your hypothetical and at the school, the shooter is a hater. Guns aren't lovers' tools, they're for haters.

I agree that anyone who commits a shooting like this is a hater, and probably hates themselves most of all. What some on this thread don't appear to wish to recognize is this kind of hatred is a mental illness that need not have any socio-political objectives. When someone kills in the name of ideology, experience shows us they are always adamant about telling us, and they take pains to attack the targets of their specific hatred, rather than those who support them or who they identify with. This latter element is completely missing here.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

You can't have it both ways. He was a student at this school. He knew the mix of students. He knew who to aim at if his attack was targeted. Oldjones is right on this. It's very difficult to construe a connection between the attitudes of this killer and the targets of his attack. There is still time to drop this course on critical thinking before you get a failing grade!

2:39 am post, I'm guessing there was a bit of alcohol involved with that one :biggrin1:

 

[oldjones]

I agree that anyone who commits a shooting like this is a hater, and probably hates themselves most of all. What some on this thread don't appear to wish to recognize is this kind of hatred is a mental illness that need not have any socio-political objectives. When someone kills in the name of ideology, experience shows us they are always adamant about telling us, and they take pains to attack the targets of their specific hatred, rather than those who support them or who they identify with. This latter element is completely missing here.

It's a defect built into this sort of forum. The easy catch phrases and the so-called thinking that goes with them are easier and faster to type. Simple thoughts; simple answers; simple minds.

At least it's not a Comments section.

 

[Frankfooter]

It's a defect built into this sort of forum. The easy catch phrases and the so-called thinking that goes with them are easier and faster to type. Simple thoughts; simple answers; simple minds.

At least it's not a Comments section.

The question shouldn't be whether or not this kid's motive for the shooting were based on racism or not, the question should be why the authorities continue to not investigate extreme right wingers and racists who exhibit violent tendencies, online threats, online anger at minorities and other signs of danger to society.

What should be clear is that extreme right wingers and white supremacists are as much a danger to society as any other group and deserve to be monitored just as closely.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

The question shouldn't be whether or not this kid's motive for the shooting were based on racism or not, the question should be why the authorities continue to not investigate extreme right wingers and racists who exhibit violent tendencies, online threats, online anger at minorities and other signs of danger to society.

What should be clear is that extreme right wingers and white supremacists are as much a danger to society as any other group and deserve to be monitored just as closely

As should extreme left-wingers and anti-semites, eh Frankie??!!!

 

[Frankfooter]

As should extreme left-wingers and anti-semites, eh Frankie??!!!

Left wingers are not a threat to the country or a threat for violence.
Racists, like anti-semites and Islamaphobes, should be monitored, I agree with that.

Racist and extremist right wingers definitely.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada...upremacist-threat-ahead-of-radical-islam.html

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Left wingers are not a threat to the country or a threat for violence

Bullshit!! Just in 2017 alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

On June 14, 2017, in Alexandria, Virginia, Republican member of Congress and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise of Louisiana was shot while practicing for the annual Congressional Baseball Game for Charity, scheduled for the following day. Also shot were Crystal Griner, a U.S. Capitol Police officer assigned to protect Scalise; Zack Barth, a congressional aide; and Matt Mika, a Tyson Foods lobbyist.

A ten-minute shootout ensued between the shooter—James Hodgkinson of Belleville, Illinois, a left-wing activist—and officers from the Capitol and Alexandria Police

 

[Frankfooter]

Bullshit!! Just in 2017 alone:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Congressional_baseball_shooting

Exactly, you found one example but that's it.
Whereas there are at least 300 by right wingers like you every year.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/u-s-sees-300-violent-attacks-inspired-far-right-every-year

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

Exactly, you found one example but that's it

Ah, but you said left-wingers posed NO threat, so you're statement is factually worng

 

[Frankfooter]

Ah, but you said left-wingers posed NO threat, so you're statement is factually worng

300 million americans.
1 incident.

0.000000003% chance of attacks
Statistically that's nothing.

its people like you that should be monitored.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

anti-semites should be monitored, I agree with that

I'm glad you agree you should be monitored as well

 

[Frankfooter]

I'm glad you agree you should be monitored as well

Then you're arguing that Independent Jewish Voices needs to be monitored for anti-semitism as well, since I've been backing the same positions they back.

We have therefore resolved to promote the expression of alternative Jewish voices, particularly in respect of the grave situation in the Middle East, which threatens the future of Palestinians and Israelis as well as the stability of the whole region. We are guided by the following principles that:

1. Human rights are universal and indivisible and should be upheld without exception. This is as applicable in Israel and Occupied Palestine as it is elsewhere.
2. Palestinians and Israelis alike have the right to peaceful and secure lives.
3. Peace and stability require the willingness of all parties to the conflict to comply with international law.
4. There is no justification for any form of racism, including anti-Semitism, anti-Arab racism or lslamaphobia in any circumstance.
5. The battle against anti-Semitism is vital and is undermined whenever opposition to Israeli government policies is automatically branded as anti-Semitic.

We hereby reclaim the tradition of Jewish support for universal freedoms, human rights and social justice. The lessons we have learned from our own history compel us to speak out.

http://ijvcanada.org/about-ijv-a-propos/ijv-basis-of-unity-vji-entente-de-principes/

Those are the ideals I've been backing on this board.
The policies you've been backing are branded as racist by the IJV.

 

[Phil C. McNasty]

The policies you've been backing are branded as racist by the IJV

Again for the umpteenth time, Palestinians are not a race

300 million americans.
1 incident.

0.000000003% chance of attacks
Statistically that's nothing

Completely false. Go through the list of mass shootings over the last few years, do you really think there are no left-wing voting Democrats amongst them??

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States