[Discussion] Mass Shootings - Yeah, we need a thread just for this...

This year is the deadliest year ever in terms of mass shootings. In a political climate of polarization, it becomes harder to suss out legitimate information from the misinformation propagated by those with political agendas. Complicating this more is the continual resistance of 2nd amendment advocates to allow for political talk surrounding these massacres. This will involve political discussion to see if there are ways we can all agree might be good ways to prevent mass shootings.

This discussion should involve the details of any current, or future mass shooting, and how they compare to past mass shootings. How are they the same? How are they different? Do gun laws have an impact? Does the race of the shooter affect how we treat them? What makes one a hate crime and one an act or terrorism? Are these shootings the price of freedom?

Looks like some kid was arrested in Missouri for showing up to a Walmart in body armor and an AR15, but it is unclear what if anything he will be charged with. Link. And it looks like he might have ground for a civil suit against the off duty fireman and the Walmart that detained him.

After several massacres in the last few weeks, it feels as if white people in America have suddenly woken up to the realization that white supremacist terrorism is actually a problem to take seriously. Hell, even the highly conservative National Review has decided to get in on the pearl clutching. Bravo. Took you long enough.

Even still, no one seems to be willing to outline how far we as a people should be willing to go to combat this existential threat to American national security. And make no mistake. It is exactly that. It threatens to take us further down this path toward fascism we seem so intent on marching down.

Are we willing to hunt down white supremacists the way we do violent jihadists? Are we willing, at least, to out them in their positions of government and law enforcement employment and root them out of positions of power? Are we willing to free ourselves from this kind of terrorism and fascism? Or are we just clutching pearls?

Because all I see is a lot of white folks saying "at least I'm not THAT bad.".

Paleocon wrote:

After several massacres in the last few weeks, it feels as if white people in America have suddenly woken up to the realization that white supremacist terrorism is actually a problem to take seriously. Hell, even the highly conservative National Review has decided to get in on the pearl clutching. Bravo. Took you long enough.

Even still, no one seems to be willing to outline how far we as a people should be willing to go to combat this existential threat to American national security. And make no mistake. It is exactly that. It threatens to take us further down this path toward fascism we seem so intent on marching down.

Are we willing to hunt down white supremacists the way we do violent jihadists? Are we willing, at least, to out them in their positions of government and law enforcement employment and root them out of positions of power? Are we willing to free ourselves from this kind of terrorism and fascism? Or are we just clutching pearls?

Because all I see is a lot of white folks saying "at least I'm not THAT bad.".

I would say the opposite has happened.. the more obvious the threat of white nationalism the more entrenched the right will get in their denials. I would guess if you took a poll even less people on the right will say that White Nationalism is a threat today compared to when Obama was in the office. Your talking about people that don't even think Slavery was that big a deal.

TheGameguru wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

After several massacres in the last few weeks, it feels as if white people in America have suddenly woken up to the realization that white supremacist terrorism is actually a problem to take seriously. Hell, even the highly conservative National Review has decided to get in on the pearl clutching. Bravo. Took you long enough.

Even still, no one seems to be willing to outline how far we as a people should be willing to go to combat this existential threat to American national security. And make no mistake. It is exactly that. It threatens to take us further down this path toward fascism we seem so intent on marching down.

Are we willing to hunt down white supremacists the way we do violent jihadists? Are we willing, at least, to out them in their positions of government and law enforcement employment and root them out of positions of power? Are we willing to free ourselves from this kind of terrorism and fascism? Or are we just clutching pearls?

Because all I see is a lot of white folks saying "at least I'm not THAT bad.".

I would say the opposite has happened.. the more obvious the threat of white nationalism the more entrenched the right will get in their denials. I would guess if you took a poll even less people on the right will say that White Nationalism is a threat today compared to when Obama was in the office. Your talking about people that don't even think Slavery was that big a deal.

The needle doesn’t really move. It’ll settle back into it’s well entrenched spot just after the bodies are buried. It’s going to take democratic states to pass legislation that gets challenged in the Highest courts, both state and federal to have any chance to begin the process of removing this insanity, just as the GOP is currently doing with abortion and women’s rights in states. Unfortunately, it’s going to take a democrat in the highest office and a Clarence Thomas in failing health to start the process at all.

TheGameguru wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

After several massacres in the last few weeks, it feels as if white people in America have suddenly woken up to the realization that white supremacist terrorism is actually a problem to take seriously. Hell, even the highly conservative National Review has decided to get in on the pearl clutching. Bravo. Took you long enough.

Even still, no one seems to be willing to outline how far we as a people should be willing to go to combat this existential threat to American national security. And make no mistake. It is exactly that. It threatens to take us further down this path toward fascism we seem so intent on marching down.

Are we willing to hunt down white supremacists the way we do violent jihadists? Are we willing, at least, to out them in their positions of government and law enforcement employment and root them out of positions of power? Are we willing to free ourselves from this kind of terrorism and fascism? Or are we just clutching pearls?

Because all I see is a lot of white folks saying "at least I'm not THAT bad.".

I would say the opposite has happened.. the more obvious the threat of white nationalism the more entrenched the right will get in their denials. I would guess if you took a poll even less people on the right will say that White Nationalism is a threat today compared to when Obama was in the office. Your talking about people that don't even think Slavery was that big a deal.

And people who are now publically denying that slavery was even a thing.

Edit: At least it feels that it has become more mainstreamed. There's always been the kindly slave owner lie.

So about that 20 year old pudwaste in Springfield, MO. Turns out that the law, however, is on his side as he was simply exercising his rights to "open carry" and may very well have grounds to sue both the armed civilian and the Springfield Walmart for kidnapping.

Now, if I were white and particularly litigious, I might be tempted to see if could get a phat payout from Walmart by trolling the f*ck out of them with my hilarious open carry antics. I know at least a dozen contingency lawyers that would be licking their chops over that sh*t.

Paleocon wrote:

So about that 20 year old pudwaste in Springfield, MO. Turns out that the law, however, is on his side as he was simply exercising his rights to "open carry" and may very well have grounds to sue both the armed civilian and the Springfield Walmart for kidnapping.

Now, if I were white and particularly litigious, I might be tempted to see if could get a phat payout from Walmart by trolling the f*ck out of them with my hilarious open carry antics. I know at least a dozen contingency lawyers that would be licking their chops over that sh*t.

As stupid as this is, I kind of hope it goes forward and helps fix the conflicts and insanity between open carry, stand your ground, and brandishing.

In a really awful way that guy could be the hero that shows the ridiculousness of open carry laws. In what dark universe is it 'right' to allow civilians to carry assault rifles while shopping? How can a person go from perfectly within their rights to mass murder within the .01 seconds it would take to raise that weapon from non threatening to threatening and pulling the trigger.

If I were a pro-gun person not lost to reason, I'd loathe those open-carry nuts. Those fools' antics are as likely as anything to get some bans passed.

I'm trying to understand what goes through these people's minds when they decide to visit Walmart strapped up like they're on patrol in Fallujah. I've got three ideas and probably a mix of all of them is at work:
* They're terrorists. They like the fear they spread in the population. They're idiots too, so maybe they've convinced themselves it's 'respect' rather than fear, but they want to emotionally affect people and they want to be noticed.
* They're paranoid, fearful fools who really believe that ISIS could descend on the Piggly Wiggly at any moment, and by god they're the big damn hero who'll be ready. They're wannabe vigilantes who want to shoot someone given half an excuse.
* They're political fanatics with a five-year-old's understanding of rights (the kind of kid who, given a divided room or car seat, will pile up all their stuff right up to the line). They really believe that by tramping around with guns they can accustom people to an armed environment.

I generally assume they’re terrorists. They know it hurts people and they keep doing it.

Just imagine how fast a black person would be shot trying to exercise those same open carry rights.

Chris Pakman made some very good points about the fallacies of the ‘good guys with guns’ argument.

TheGameguru wrote:

Just imagine how fast a black person would be shot trying to exercise those same open carry rights.

Gun rights absolutely mean ‘white privilege’ and very little else. A POC doing the same thing would be fortunate not to get shot by PD or a bystander. People keep saying that he had body armor, but it looks like ALICE gear. Body armor being worn by civilians is illegal in any jurisdiction I know of.

My guess is that if the off duty firefighter that ‘accosted’ him would have shot and killed him, there would have been less litigation.

BlackSheep wrote:

Body armor being worn by civilians is illegal in any jurisdiction I know of.

It is legal to carry a weapon, but wearing defense against said weapons are not? Damn.

After the Latest Pair of Mass Shootings, Betty White Has Become a Meme and White People Aren't Happy About It

Betty White is a national treasure.

The comedian and actress has been doing the damn thing since what feels like the dawn of time, and even at 97 years of age she still makes it a point to bless us all with her trademark spunk and sass.

But this sh*t is funny.

Betty white
Bet he white
Ohhhhhhh! Yeah, that’s funny.

For those of you who aren’t card-carrying members of the Black Delegation, we have this thing where if we hear about a crime or some wild sh*t in the news, we hope to God the culprit isn’t black. A woman gets busted for peeing on potatoes in Wal-Mart? Her ass better not be black. And about the only time we don’t have that fear is when it’s a mass shooting, because crimes of that nature are almost universally carried out by—wait for it—white guys.

So yes, every time this cycle of death continues with the disturbing news of yet another mass shooting, I automatically assume the coward abusing his 2nd Amendment rights is another Trump-touting “Liam” or “Garrett.”

Betty White, indeed.

Yet despite this rather sound logic, and Chris Rock deciding to use humor to call a thing a thing, there are living, breathing human beings calling this meme racist. No, really. Because Melanin Deficient Instagram (and Twitter) isn’t always there when you call, but it’s always overly sensitive.

“You can’t fight racism with racism,” one user commented. “You’re just contributing to the problem.”

“This is racist,” added another.

“Dont ya love how this is racist but nobody cares because he is black,” another wrote.

And last but not least: “Although it’s comedy, it’s still racist.”

Meanwhile, I stumbled upon one comment that I finally agreed with: “Yo these wypipo in your comments hella pressed.”

Really, though.

Clearly, mass shootings aren’t a laughing matter, but using humor to redirect or anesthetize our pain isn’t exactly a revolutionary act. Betty White has yet to comment on this now-viral meme, but I’m pretty damn sure she’d agree with Rock.

Shadout wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:

Body armor being worn by civilians is illegal in any jurisdiction I know of.

It is legal to carry a weapon, but wearing defense against said weapons are not? Damn.

Well, here in Texas, you can carry a handgun with a license - either open or concealed. You can carry a long gun so long as you have the right to (I.e. not a felon); however, body armor is considered paramilitary gear and is not allowable since it might negate the stopping power of a 9mm, particularly if it has ceramic plates inserted (which will stop many rifle rounds) and body armor isn’t ‘protected’ under 2nd amendment rights like a gun is. It doesn’t make sense. It’s not supposed to anymore.

Personally, that guy in Missouri with his bullsh*t getup needed a solid pistol whipping.

BlackSheep wrote:
Shadout wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:

Body armor being worn by civilians is illegal in any jurisdiction I know of.

It is legal to carry a weapon, but wearing defense against said weapons are not? Damn.

Well, here in Texas, you can carry a handgun with a license - either open or concealed. You can carry a long gun so long as you have the right to (I.e. not a felon); however, body armor is considered paramilitary gear and is not allowable since it might negate the stopping power of a 9mm, particularly if it has ceramic plates inserted (which will stop many rifle rounds) and body armor isn’t ‘protected’ under 2nd amendment rights like a gun is. It doesn’t make sense. It’s not supposed to anymore.

Personally, that guy in Missouri with his bullsh*t getup needed a solid pistol whipping.

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

You've obviously never gone hunting with Dick Cheney.

imbiginjapan wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

You've obviously never gone hunting with Dick Cheney.

no, but if i did i'm sure i would make a televised apology for having the temerity to look like a game bird.

thrawn82 wrote:
imbiginjapan wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

You've obviously never gone hunting with Dick Cheney.

no, but if i did i'm sure i would make a televised apology for having the temerity to look like a game bird.

Meh - birdshot only hurts if you get it in your eye.

TheGameguru wrote:

Just imagine how fast a black person would be shot trying to exercise those same open carry rights.

A black guy was shot within two seconds at walmart when he was buying a toy gun. So we don't have to imagine what would happen.

Well, at least they caught this guy beforehand.

A 23-year-old Las Vegas man who allegedly wanted to attack Jews and patrons of an LGBTQ bar was arrested on suspicion of possessing parts to make a bomb, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Nevada said Friday.

Conor Climo, who was arrested Thursday, was connected to white supremacists though encrypted online conversations, federal prosecutors said.

After Climo's arrest, FBI agents said he told them he had acquired electronic components to build a bomb and that he wanted to mobilize an eight-man sniper platoon to shoot Jewish people either at a Las Vegas synagogue or some other location.

According to charging documents, an FBI bomb technician found bomb-making components and chemical compounds in Climo's bedroom. Federal agents said they also seized an AR-15 style rifle and a bolt-action rifle from the room.

Climo tried to recruit a homeless person to engage in "pre-attack surveillance" on a house of worship and wanted to target patrons of an LGBTQ bar on Fremont Street in downtown Las Vegas, federal prosecutors said in a statement.

Agents say Climo sketched images of such an attack in drawings that included two infantry squads attacking the bar with guns from the outside and one attacking it from the inside.

He allegedly told agents, according to FBI officials, that over the past two years he thought of several ideas to carry out an attack on Jews.

It is intensely depressing to realize, after last weekend, that this almost certainly isn't as bad as it's going to get.

BlackSheep wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:
imbiginjapan wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

You've obviously never gone hunting with Dick Cheney.

no, but if i did i'm sure i would make a televised apology for having the temerity to look like a game bird.

Meh - birdshot only hurts if you get it in your eye.

That $%^@ stings like a M#$%#$ F#$%@!. Only deadly in the eye, or like, close range.

EverythingsTentative wrote:
BlackSheep wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:
imbiginjapan wrote:
thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

You've obviously never gone hunting with Dick Cheney.

no, but if i did i'm sure i would make a televised apology for having the temerity to look like a game bird.

Meh - birdshot only hurts if you get it in your eye.

That $%^@ stings like a M#$%#$ F#$%@!. Only deadly in the eye, or like, close range.

Sounds like first hand experience. I’ve only had second hand experience and picked it out of patients that have been shot by it.

31-year-old 3-D printed gun activist Cody Wilson won't be able to own any guns for the next seven years because he paid a 16-year-old girl he met on SugarDaddyMeet.com for sex last year and will have to register as a sex offender.

He fled to Taiwan after learning he was being investigated and only resigned as CEO of Defense Distributed, an online repository for digital schematics of firearms, after he was tracked down and arrested in a Taipei hotel.

Yahoo News: Here's the data on white supremacist terrorism the Trump administration has been 'unable or unwilling' to give to Congress

WASHINGTON — Alleged white supremacists were responsible for all race-based domestic terrorism incidents in 2018, according to a government document distributed earlier this year to state, local and federal law enforcement.

The document, which has not been previously reported on, becomes public as the Trump administration’s Justice Department has been unable or unwilling to provide data to Congress on white supremacist domestic terrorism.

The data in this document, titled “Domestic Terrorism in 2018,” appears to be what Congress has been asking for — and didn’t get.

Wish I could read the Yahoo article but all it does is pop up an uncloseable ad telling me to get their news mobile app. I can read it just fine in chrome if they'd let me, thanks.

Stele wrote:

Wish I could read the Yahoo article but all it does is pop up an uncloseable ad telling me to get their news mobile app. I can read it just fine in chrome if they'd let me, thanks.

Here ya go

https://outline.com/g6HBrg

BlackSheep wrote:

People keep saying that he had body armor, but it looks like ALICE gear. Body armor being worn by civilians is illegal in any jurisdiction I know of.

You can buy and wear body armor in all 50 states. The exceptions are pretty common-sense, typically prohibiting the purchase of body armor by felons and making it an additional crime to wear body armor while committing a crime.

thrawn82 wrote:

well. It IS paramilitary gear. There's no way to make the hunting arguments that (foolish or disingenuous) people make regarding things like AR-15s.

The argument for wearing body armor is pretty much the same as the argument for wearing a motorcycle helmet while riding a motorcycle or wearing a hard hat at a construction site. It's become very common to see people at ranges with plate carriers, and I can't recommend it enough - good armor is quite inexpensive these days and there's no real excuse.

Paleocon wrote:

Even still, no one seems to be willing to outline how far we as a people should be willing to go to combat this existential threat to American national security. And make no mistake. It is exactly that. It threatens to take us further down this path toward fascism we seem so intent on marching down.

Is terrorism a threat? Yes. Is it an existential threat? Hardly. At most it qualifies as a very minor threat. Terrorism of all stripes is statistically far less dangerous than things like water and cars. Its primary effect is large-scale and outsized fear, particularly when promoted. Any potential existential threat comes from the government response to terrorism.

Think hard about this. Do you really want the US government to respond to the very minor threat of white supremacist terrorism the same way they responded to the very minor threat of Islamic terrorism?

Aetius wrote:

Think hard about this. Do you really want the US government to respond to the very minor threat of white supremacist terrorism the same way they responded to the very minor threat of Islamic terrorism?

No, but they could at least stop encouraging it.