RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC

RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

PeonForHer -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 11:44:32 AM)
As I said, Sanity - why, in my very last post, as it happens - we already know from the standardly far-right supporters here that gun control won't and can't work. So, what's your solution, if you have one? Sigh. I can see that this is going to turn into one of those tedious threads where certain people do nothing except sit waiting to pounce on the first one who suggests gun control ....

PeonForHer -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 11:46:06 AM)
quote: I was pretty sure that would be you're response. Intellectual escapism. Let others post ideas you can criticize. Don't ever post a personal thought. By god you're class act. You wriggle out of offering any ideas by accusing your opponent himself of wriggling! [:D]

tweakabelle -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 11:52:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Tweak I see no difference at all.. Would you not say the actions of this man could only be performed by someone insane? Below i am posting some of your comments that could easily be said about this man. I could post more they are all over that thread and I really do not mean to be putting you in an uncomfortable position… but I don’t think you see the irony of your posts in this thread. Butch I also stated at the beginning of my post : "The picture emerging is that of one deranged individual, with a long and troubled history of violence and sexual predation, acting alone for motives that are yet to be identified accurately" He had consulted two different psychiatrists, both of which diagnosed mental disorders. He was facing over 40 charges of sexual assault and predation. He was facing charges relating to the attempted murder of his ex-wife. He was wanted in Iran for serious fraud charges. At the inquest (which is still ongoing) it emerged that there no contact or communications between the hostage taker and IS, in whose name he claimed to act. His claims to be acting on behalf of IS turned out to be another elaborate fantasy of his, just another one of many self-promoting fantasies that seem to be a central feature of his life. These facts seem to me to put him in a very different category to Roof, who had 2 minor brushes with the law, one for drug possession and another for trespass, and at least one of these cases hasn't' proceeded to trial yet. No one has mentioned any professional help or intervention in Roof's life to date. Another thing to consider is that the hostage case was the first of its kind in Australia. Roof's crimes fall into established patterns of crime in the US. To me these differences, especially the history of mental illnesses and sexual predation in one case and their absence in the other case, are significant enough to more than justify putting these offenders in very different categories. Mental illness means the criminal has diminished responsibility for their actions. This mitigating factor is not available to Roof on what is known to date. Nor do I believe that Roof's crimes could only have been committed by someone insane - there are innumerable examples of fanatics of one cause or another carrying out atrocities. To commit such a crime one has to be dehumanised, but fanatical adherence to an ideology and/or fanatical self righteousness can propel humans to carry out some of the worst crimes humans have committed without any element of insanity

HunterCA -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 11:59:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was pretty sure that would be you're response. Intellectual escapism. Let others post ideas you can criticize. Don't ever post a personal thought. By god you're class act. You wriggle out of offering any ideas by accusing your opponent himself of wriggling! [:D] And yet, I offer ideas all the time on threads and you say, nup, I won't cast pearls before swine. Peon, it's your style. Why do you feel shamed by it? It's what you do.

kdsub -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:10:05 PM)
Peon Mod Three will smite us from her lofty perch if we try to turn this tragedy into another gun control thread. To me there are multiple offshoots to this thread. Racism of course… is this a symptom of racism in America or is it the action of a mentally ill racists not indicative of the feelings of non-black America. Easy access to the weapon of choice for many murderers these days. Lack of affordable mental heath care in the US. To me however the heart of this tragedy is a trend towards radicalism in America. Would this have happened without recent racial turmoil and the radical responses to it? Below is what I mean… A petty criminal showing disrespect for the law acts in a radical manner to a simple arrest. A police officer responds in a radical manner by unnecessarily killing an unarmed suspect. Radical protestors react to this shooting and subsequent not guilty grand jury decision with looting and arson. Another petty criminal resists arrest in a radical manner. Police react to his resistance in a radical manner killing him Again protestors react in a radical manner in looting and arson. I could go on and on but it seems reason has left many of us and we seem to react in an uncompromising and radical manner….WHY.. I think I know. I believe this tragedy is a radical response to a previous radical response and there will be a radical response to this in the future… we need to break this self destructive way of thinking. Back to the why… I believe the blame can be laid at the feet of the media… be it main stream or social networking. Half truths and misinformation arrive at the speed of light and human nature takes over from there. It used to take time for news to travel and our mainstream media outlets did not have to compete with social networks so they could take the time to check sources and get the facts… not today. To sell for sponsors and compete with the internet they often purposely post inflammatory stories full of half truths and unsupported rhetoric… just to keep watchers. As for the social networks… ever play the game in school where a sentence is whispered in the ear at the head of the class and whispered from child to child? The final result is compared to the original and is never the same… Will that happens in social networking as well. What is the answer? Well… the internet is here to stay so I suppose the only answer is to emphasize the pitfalls of the modern communication age in our schools and demand our media outlets follow the rules of good journalism or loose the licenses. Butch

PeonForHer -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:16:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was pretty sure that would be you're response. Intellectual escapism. Let others post ideas you can criticize. Don't ever post a personal thought. By god you're class act. You wriggle out of offering any ideas by accusing your opponent himself of wriggling! [:D] And yet, I offer ideas all the time on threads and you say, nup, I won't cast pearls before swine. Peon, it's your style. Why do you feel shamed by it? It's what you do. Strewth. OK then. How about this: I put out an idea for political change that might help prevent such atrocities in the future. If you disagree, which of course is your privilege, you suggest your own idea. Deal? Assuming 'yes, it's a deal' and moving past the elephant in the room, the matter of guns: this atrocity is front page news here in Britain. We're all becoming somewhat acquainted with aspects of culture in that particular part of the USA about which we'd only been hazily aware before. One of those aspects is that the state is still steeped in reminders of slave-owning days. The confederate flag still flies over the capitol. It wasn't lowered to half mast, as apparently is usual when there's a tragedy that affects the whole state. Streets are named after confederate generals. So I would move to change such things. But - and here we get to another reason why I asked you for your solutions - I know little about the culture of the state in question. I'm not even American. So perhaps you could enlighten me with your superior knowledge?

BamaD -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:16:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I agree with charging the father as well. Accessory to murder seems reasonable, for providing the gun used. Ehh.. maybe not. Seems Roof hadn't been convicted of a felony yet. He was out on bond for drug charges, awaiting trial. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/18/everything-known-about-charleston-church-shooting-suspect-dylann-roof.html At a minimum they should be able to get him for lying om the form if the gun was new.

Sanity -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:17:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer As I said, Sanity - why, in my very last post, as it happens - we already know from the standardly far-right supporters here that gun control won't and can't work. So, what's your solution, if you have one? Sigh. I can see that this is going to turn into one of those tedious threads where certain people do nothing except sit waiting to pounce on the first one who suggests gun control .... A solution... How about, try the guy for murder. Or were you thinking something more along the lines of, empower the government to brutally control everyone with an iron fist

kdsub -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:20:07 PM)
Tweak... insane actions are easily recognized and both were insane actions. In good conscious I cannot see how you can justify one obvious insane act and not another simply because of your political positions on the subjects. The act is insane... it makes no difference how long a history each insane person has before they act. I've made my point and will not keep repeating myself... Anyway when it comes to this man I most likely agree with you... his act deserves the maximum penalty whatever it is...and his mental state should NOT be considered... he may be nuts but he is a killer first. Butch

PeonForHer -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:20:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Sanity A solution... How about, try the guy for murder. Or were you thinking something more along the lines of, empower the government to brutally control everyone with an iron fist If it's just one guy and this is a one-off, not to be considered against any other trends ... that would suffice. But many -including some on the right - are saying it is, in fact, a trend. So what would your solution be, Sanity, given that?

BamaD -> RE: ThiRE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:22:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Do you deny that the apparently easy access to firearms by psychos is a significant part of the problem at hand? If you are actually denying this, what in your view is the problem at hand? The problem at hand is the evil in this mans heart. He could not legally buy a firearm, our laws would have prevented that. His father refused to see the sickness in his soul and circumvented the law to get him a firearm. As proven in Boston the lack of firearms doesn't stop evil, they made bombs from pressure cookers. France has far tougher gun laws than we do. didn't slow down the Charlie Hebdo attack did it. Norway had a worse incident than anything that has happened in the US except for 9/11 and OK city, in case you are unaware of it neither of them used firearms. Do you really want these people to go over to bombs? As I pointed out earlier a Molotov cocktail is very easy to make and just as lethal. Of course if you think that the gun exercised it's will over the man you can dismiss this but otherwise you have to see that he should have gotten treatment long ago and the failure to do so is a major part of the problem. He and his father ignored our gun laws, not to mention laws against things like murder so there is no reason, except a devotion to a political agenda, to think he wouldn't have found another means to perform his evil act. The quaintly moral claim that "evil in the heart" motivated this killer doesn't wash. This incident is the latest in a long series of outrages that conform to two distinct patterns: like Australia, the US has a long history of racist murders and crimes; and the US has suffered a succession of mass shootings in recent years. One might ascribe a single isolated incident to "evil in the heart" but that thesis is grossly inadequate to explain two long series of similar outrages. quote: Do you really want these people to go over to bombs? This is an extraordinary question to ask. It implicitly accepts that these outrages are going to occur and seems to suggest that it's better to let psychos have access to firearms as they will not be quite as lethal as bombs. Surely, the point is to stop these thugs wreaking havoc on the community, to stop the evil not to ask which is the lesser evil and concede that to the thugs. There seems to be a consensus that this was a hate crime. So one question that needs to asked is: Where did this killer get all that hate from? He wasn't born with it. No one is born a racist. He learnt it from some part of the culture around him. So establishing precisely how and where he acquired his racist hate, and taking steps to eradicate the source of his hate seems an obvious step to me. Finally I am glad to see that you agree that the killer and his father broke the gun laws. The fact that the killer was given a gun as a 21st birthday 'present' (of all things!) suggests that no one pays any attention to current gun restrictions, that they are regarded as a joke, that they are broken with impunity. Whatever the current penalties for breaking gun laws are, they were obviously insufficient to deter the father from trafficking in arms. IOW current gun laws, or the penalties for breaking them are far too lax. First when did I claim they didn't violate laws? I had said that before you entered this thread. Since the penalty for murder didn't deter what penalty for gun laws would. You state that the idea that the crime is based on the evil in his heart is quaint then you admit that the problem is his hate. I noticed that you ignored that Europe with its draconian gun laws has had worse shooting incidents than the US and that the worst incidents here did not involve guns.

BamaD -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:24:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy 1. Shooting sprees are not rare in the United States. 2. Gun ownership in the United States is declining overall, but nearly a third of households still have a gun. 3. Active shooter events have become more common in recent years 4. Of the 12 deadliest shootings in the United States, six have happened from 2007 onward. 5. America is an unusually violent country. But we're not as violent as we used to be. 6. The South is the most violent region in the United States. 7. More guns tend to mean more homicide. 8. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence. 9. Gun control, in general, has not been politically popular -- and its popularity has been declining lately. 10. While general gun control isn't that popular, particular policies are. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/18/11-essential-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/ Two bad not a single point is accurate.

Sanity -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:25:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer If it's just one guy and this is a one-off, not to be considered against any other trends ... that would suffice. But many -including some on the right - are saying it is, in fact, a trend. So what would your solution be, Sanity, given that? We could start by ousting the race baiter we currently have as president, and in the future elect leaders who are genuinely interested in healing race relations rather than fomenting racial hatred

BamaD -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:28:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy This is as depraved as any massacre can be. If the victims at the Christian church were white and the perp were Muslim, Sanity would be more concerned and alarmed. Domestic Terrorism doesn't really concern him. He probably doesn't believe we can curb domestic terrorism, but somehow thinks we can curb it abroad. Each is a noble goal, but BUSH's "War on Terrorism" only made things worse. Yep. Sanity is a bit hasty in labelling him a "lone madman". At this point we don't know if any others were involved or not, and Roof's depravity is consistent with that of a fanatic, not a lunatic. There are lot of unanswered questions at this point in time. Hopefully things will become clearer with time. On the evidence available now, Roof is a terrorist, a domestic white far right racist terrorist. You have routinely made the same claim for Islamist terrorists who got their ideas from ISIS sites. I would say that both could easily be called terrorists.

BamaD -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:31:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Tweak may I ask why you so adamantly defended the actions of the Islamic murder in Australia because he was obviously insane... Yet refuse to even consider this murderer could also be mentally ill and exhibit the same compassion toward him? Myself I believe they are both murderers and do not deserve to share another breath with civilized humans...but I am curious why you are taking opposing positions on obviously insane murderers. Here you are calling him a terrorists yet when I tried to say the same about the murderer in your country you defended him as an act of insanity not terrorism...Will is this not the same? Butch KD, the difference is the 'Islamist' here had a long history of mental illnesses, psychiatric diagnoses and bizarre public behaviour, as I pointed out in the other thread. As far as I know, no one has suggested that Roof is mentally ill thus far, though that may change in the future. That was suggested from the first news article on. I suspect that it doesn't make good press in Australia when they can focus on race.

Sanity -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:52:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Tweak may I ask why you so adamantly defended the actions of the Islamic murder in Australia because he was obviously insane... Yet refuse to even consider this murderer could also be mentally ill and exhibit the same compassion toward him? Myself I believe they are both murderers and do not deserve to share another breath with civilized humans...but I am curious why you are taking opposing positions on obviously insane murderers. Here you are calling him a terrorists yet when I tried to say the same about the murderer in your country you defended him as an act of insanity not terrorism...Will is this not the same? Butch KD, the difference is the 'Islamist' here had a long history of mental illnesses, psychiatric diagnoses and bizarre public behaviour, as I pointed out in the other thread. As far as I know, no one has suggested that Roof is mentally ill thus far, though that may change in the future. That was suggested from the first news article on. I suspect that it doesn't make good press in Australia when they can focus on race. Did tweaka (or the media at the time) harp on the Australian psychopaths Iranian ancestry, as they do with Dylann Roofs race

HunterCA -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 12:55:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: ORIGINAL: HunterCA quote: ORIGINAL: PeonForHer quote: I was pretty sure that would be you're response. Intellectual escapism. Let others post ideas you can criticize. Don't ever post a personal thought. By god you're class act. You wriggle out of offering any ideas by accusing your opponent himself of wriggling! [:D] And yet, I offer ideas all the time on threads and you say, nup, I won't cast pearls before swine. Peon, it's your style. Why do you feel shamed by it? It's what you do. Strewth. OK then. How about this: I put out an idea for political change that might help prevent such atrocities in the future. If you disagree, which of course is your privilege, you suggest your own idea. Deal? Assuming 'yes, it's a deal' and moving past the elephant in the room, the matter of guns: this atrocity is front page news here in Britain. We're all becoming somewhat acquainted with aspects of culture in that particular part of the USA about which we'd only been hazily aware before. One of those aspects is that the state is still steeped in reminders of slave-owning days. The confederate flag still flies over the capitol. It wasn't lowered to half mast, as apparently is usual when there's a tragedy that affects the whole state. Streets are named after confederate generals. So I would move to change such things. But - and here we get to another reason why I asked you for your solutions - I know little about the culture of the state in question. I'm not even American. So perhaps you could enlighten me with your superior knowledge? I'll wait until you post an idea of your own. I agree guns are not going to be in this thread. Yet, I'd point out that the last sort of thing like this to happen, a black church in the south attacked and people killed that got a lot of news, was blown up by a bomb. I'm not sure, well am am sure, that on a planet with a few billion people you're ever going to stop this sort of thing and I'm certainly not willing to give the government more power out of fear that it may happen again. It will happen again despite how much power the government has. Please look to previous posts where similar incidents happen in China with a very strong government. I suggest we allow those people to mourn, as man has done forever and will continue to do without making it a political issue. The mayor of Carleton is on your side of the gun debate, and presumably, although I haven't researched it, a lefty and more politically attuned to you. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/shaken-charleston-mayor-far-too-many-guns-out-there/2015/06/18/8e59c9dc-15b6-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html The govenor of the state is conservative, but a child of an immigrant family from India. So, I doubt he can be defined as a historically white racist. This whole country is steeped in slavery from the past and will continue to be so until we stop making that an excuse in the black community. I might add, that that part of the country we obtained from the French and also has a very heavy French cultural over tone. It used to be a major port for the importation of slaves and does have added portent toward slavery in that regard. Why flags are not at half mast is something the liberal mayor might answer, or the immigrant family India roots governor might answer, but if you're implying it's because things are run by conservative white racist you'll have to look elsewhere. Usually, in California, we do it for things such as this. As to the confederate flag, there is much discussion here about that. Many blacks feel it symbolizes slavery. Of course, to them slavery was the major issue of our civil war. To many others, slavery was not the major issue in the civil war until Lincoln made it so in order to spur northern men to accept the draft he instituted to fight the war already in progress. You might note that the civil war didn't even free all of the slaves. There were several states that did not join the confederacy which maintained slaves with the consent of the north after Lincoln's emancipation of the slaves in the confederacy.

BamaD -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 1:01:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thishereboi quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic another bullshit assumption well I was replying to a whole post of bullshit assumptions so it is what it is. Funny that you noticed mine and totally skipped over his. If I didn't know better I would say you only see the bad on one side and not the other. [8\|] No, it is that she thinks that CB's post was accurate.

Sanity -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 1:05:10 PM)
Obama ran to the nearest microphone to politicize the tragedy quote: Gov. Bobby Jindal called President Barack Obama's comments following the mass shooting at a South Carolina church "completely shameful" during an interview on Fox News Thursday (June 18). "I think it was completely shameful," Jindal said about Obama's remarks. "Within 24 hours we've got the president trying to score cheap political points." During a press conference Thursday, the president made waves with pointed comments about access to guns and violence in the United States.

HunterCA -> RE: Unidentified Man attacks Black Church in SC (6/19/2015 1:07:47 PM)
Apparently, rather than let people mourn the actions of a madman, lots of people are turning it into a political circus, including on here. Wasn't that called and disputed as by Peon yesterday?

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875