• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224:1119]

Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

complete nonsense. your numbers game is based on false premises that good people having lots of guns is a problem. and your calls for gun control are based on your dislike of the politics of the people you perceive to be gun owners. and when we ask you what would be "effective gun control" you don't answer with solutions to criminals or nutcases getting guns but you want stuff that harasses law abiding gun owners-which of course is the goal of those who push gun control for political paybacks

your comments about the NRA is the standard nonsense from ban guns inc-trying to pretend the NRA is a spokesman for the gun industry--this is both false and the standard talking point of the brady bunch etc

And there's the problem - what liberals (and the governments and populations of every other first-world democracy on the planet) see as common sense - required registration, required safety training, restriction of firearms and magazines that have no purpose in the civilian community - YOU see as "harassment"...

...never mind that in EVERY first-world democracy around the world today, where that "harassment" is found, the society is MUCH less violent...and far fewer innocent people are murdered. Pick a first-world democracy - ANY first-world democracy - other than America, and what do you find? That it's a heck of a lot SAFER to walk down the streets at night than it is in America...

...and this holds true even in nations with significantly larger Muslim populations than our own (for those Islamophobes out there).

But I forget - going through even a little bureaucratic hassle to legally own guns is TYRANNYYYYYYY!!!!! But if thousands more innocent men, women, and children die because we've got more guns than people in America, well, THAT's quite acceptable, 'cause freedom, y'know!
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

And there's the problem - what liberals (and the governments and populations of every other first-world democracy on the planet) see as common sense - required registration, required safety training, restriction of firearms and magazines that have no purpose in the civilian community - YOU see as "harassment"...

...never mind that in EVERY first-world democracy around the world today, where that "harassment" is found, the society is MUCH less violent...and far fewer innocent people are murdered. Pick a first-world democracy - ANY first-world democracy - other than America, and what do you find? That it's a heck of a lot SAFER to walk down the streets at night than it is in America...

...and this holds true even in nations with significantly larger Muslim populations than our own (for those Islamophobes out there).

But I forget - going through even a little bureaucratic hassle to legally own guns is TYRANNYYYYYYY!!!!! But if thousands more innocent men, women, and children die because we've got more guns than people in America, well, THAT's quite acceptable, 'cause freedom, y'know!

The language of the Second Amendment is quite clear. I don't think it applies in other countries.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

The family got to have their words heard by the killer at the bail meeting.

This is one snippet of a family member:
'I forgive you, my family forgives you,' Anthony Thompson, a relative of Myra Thompson, told him. 'But... take this opportunity to repent. Repent. Confess. Give your life to the one that matters the most - Christ - so that he can change you and change your ways no matter what happened to you, and you'll be OK. Do that and you'll be better off than you are right now.'


These people are heads and shoulders above me. I could never be this civilized. But I am trying.


Charleston shooting victim
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

What's coming out is that he is a white supremist with an addiction to opiates. He was on a drug meant to wean him off the opiates....however one of the side effects of the drug is violent behavior,

There is so much yet to learn. Was anybody monitoring Roof's response to the med?

Roof's roommate is now giving interviews and claiming that Roof had been planning something for six months. Why didn't the roommate speak up? What was Roof doing to pay the rent?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

More bigoted nonsense. You're right, I did say there's no connection to political ideology - there isn't, at this point in time - to suggest there is, is simply your attempt to make it political so that, as usual, the left can hammer away at conservatives as ideologically racist. People on the right, such as myself, simply dismiss you as a bigot when we see and hear such statements as yours. You talk about modern conservatism and then talk about the 1950s and 60s - geeze.

If and when it becomes clear that this 21yr old was somehow steeped in conservative politics and had some grand master plan to rid the world of liberals, then I'll admit to it. Until then, I'm not playing your game. What we know is that this young man was/is a racist and this young man had issues with black men having relationships with white women. Some have speculated that he experienced a black man taking away a white girl he liked - I don't know - but clearly from what we've seen he had a great deal of unnatural animus towards black people.

"Bigoted nonsense". Hmph.

If mine is bigoted nonsense, then yours is simple (and perhaps willful) ignorance. You haven't lived it, you haven't seen it firsthand...and I have. You dismiss the political dynamic of the 1950's and 60's as if that was too long ago to make any difference today...but you really have no clue.

For instance, Mississippi didn't officially ratify the 13th Amendment - you know, the one that outlawed slavery - until the year TWO THOUSAND THIRTEEN. Yes, that was TWO YEARS ago, sir. Oh, they'll say that the vote to do so was passed in the MS congress back in 1995, that it was an "administrative error" that kept them from sending it in to D.C. to finalize the ratification...but those of us who grew up down there and understand what it's like know better. It's just like in 1984, when I walked down the street in Shaw, MS where I graduated high school a few years before - the "whites" and "coloreds" signs were still posted above the two segregated entrances to the only doctor's office in town. No one raised an eyebrow - it's just the way it was, even twenty years after the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

Imagine that - Mississippi didn't ratify the amendment banning slavery until 138 freaking years AFTER the amendment became part of our Constitution...but YOU would have us believe that the politics down there doesn't have anything to do with racism. You, sir, haven't a freaking clue.

And explaining this to you appears to be sorta like explaining color to a man who has worn completely-blackened goggles since birth: you could take off the blinders at any time and see what colors are really like, but until you do so, any explanation of color to you is nothing more than nonsense.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

The family got to have their words heard by the killer at the bail meeting.

This is one snippet of a family member:


These people are heads and shoulders above me. I could never be this civilized. But I am trying.


Charleston shooting victim

But you can see that love triumphs over evil. ;)
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Nixon was for gun control
Bush 1 was for gun control
Reagan was for gun control


All major GOP heroes.

Nixon wanted to ban handguns

no pro gun advocate holds him up as a gun rights supporter

Bush I vetoed the brady bill but caved and issued an executive order banning some imports-no one holds him up as a pro rights advocate

Reagan only signed the Hughes Amendment because he wanted to pro gun M-V bill to pass. after he left office, his senility caught up with him and he tried t salve the butt hurt of the Bradys. His justice Scalia wrote Heller
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

In point of fact, if it weren't for the Emancipation Proclamation (which was deeply unpopular in the North anyway), the Union wouldn't have much of any "moral high ground" with regards to race over the Confederacy at all.

Y'know, your second paragraph is a great example of false equivalency. To be sure, your opinion is not much different from that of most whites in the South of my youth (including myself at the time), that it was "The War of Northern Aggression", that it was never about slavery, but about economics. But since then I've learned a few things. Yes, the Union was not perfect, but when it came to morality, yes sir, the Union most certainly DID have the moral high ground from the very beginning.

What's the proof? Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with Mississippi's Articles of Secession:

A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union

In the momentous step, which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.

Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery - the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product, which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.

That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.

The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.

The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.
The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.

It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.

It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.


It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.

It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact, which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.

It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.


It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice.
It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists.
It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better.

It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives.

It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security.

...

Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England.

Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Just when I thought the far Left couldnt get any dumber :doh


CvPy9Vy.jpg
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

You haven't proposed any solutions.

What are you saying the problem is?

For the record, if you keep replying and not saying anything we aren't going to get anywhere. You are making claims, but you are refusing to actually discuss it. Explain what you are saying and why you think it will work.

Do I need to type slower?

You can't propose solutions if you can't recognize the problem.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Just when I thought the far Left couldnt get any dumber :doh


CvPy9Vy.jpg

LOL, you didn't read the article before you posted that, did you?

That's what it is about- that the right seeks to blame Muslims or blacks in general when individual Muslims or blacks do something horrible, but the right doesn't apply the same approach to whites. The headline, and the subtitle, are mocking right wing headlines about black and Muslim acts. For example "where are the white fathers" is one of the subtitles, which is a play on a Fox editorial "where are the black fathers" and so on.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

You're neglecting the fact that SC and the rest of the Deep South are still vehemently racist. The guy didn't start a race war; a race war already exists in that part of the country.

Despite the image SC officials are trying to portray to the rest of the country, the perp who shot up the church will be hailed as a hero by most of the Whites living in SC.
This may be true for some of the people but more importantly,(and maybe you could lend your expertise here), how do you think this will be received by the Equus africanus asinus population?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Just when I thought the far Left couldnt get any dumber :doh


CvPy9Vy.jpg

salon and mother jones and DU exist to make radical lefties look reasonable compared to these kook sites
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

The language of the Second Amendment is quite clear. I don't think it applies in other countries.

Yes, the SA is quite clear indeed...and the obvious context of the first clause - the preparatory clause which sets the context of the entirety of the Amendment, particularly in view of the political issues and debates of the time over whether we should have an army at all or instead simply rely upon militias - is flatly ignored by the modern gun-rights lobby.

I really don't want to debate it - not because I can't prove my point to my satisfaction, but because every such debate I've seen devolves into what I can only liken to a religious debate over Biblical texts wherein with rhetorical tap-dancing, one side will obfuscate or flatly ignore the obvious text and the context thereof. Why? Because that side absolutely must at all costs protect its beliefs, its dogma.

And so it is with the SA - to modern gun-rights enthusiasts, the obvious context of the preparatory clause and the politics of the time in which it was written must be ignored, or at a minimum, twisted in order to protect their beliefs, their dogma. It's a religious debate in form, if not in function.

And that's why I really do try to stay out of SA debates - they're a waste of time and effort.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Do I need to type slower?

You can't propose solutions if you can't recognize the problem.

actually everyone knows what the problems are. liberals who want to punish gun owners with gun bans or other stupid restrictions pretend that guns are the problem but never have any rational solutions. the reason why is that solving or preventing crime is only a pre textual motivation. the real motivation is to punish people for their politics.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

salon and mother jones and DU exist to make radical lefties look reasonable compared to these kook sites

Yes, TD looks at the comments section of a site and assumes that those anonymous individuals who post such comments speak for all liberals and lefties.

This would be very much like me pointing to comments by white supremacists and claiming they speak for all conservatives and righties.

But that is what's called a broad-brush logical fallacy - and it's stupid. I know that, and that's why I don't do that. TD hasn't learned this yet, apparently.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

actually everyone knows what the problems are. liberals who want to punish gun owners with gun bans or other stupid restrictions pretend that guns are the problem but never have any rational solutions. the reason why is that solving or preventing crime is only a pre textual motivation. the real motivation is to punish people for their politics.

Gosh. It must be so hard to always be a victim.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Yes, the SA is quite clear indeed...and the obvious context of the first clause - the preparatory clause which sets the context of the entirety of the Amendment, particularly in view of the political issues and debates of the time over whether we should have an army at all or instead simply rely upon militias - is flatly ignored by the modern gun-rights lobby.

I really don't want to debate it - not because I can't prove my point to my satisfaction, but because every such debate I've seen devolves into what I can only liken to a religious debate over Biblical texts wherein with rhetorical tap-dancing, one side will obfuscate or flatly ignore the obvious text and the context thereof. Why? Because that side absolutely must at all costs protect its beliefs, its dogma.

And so it is with the SA - to modern gun-rights enthusiasts, the obvious context of the preparatory clause and the politics of the time in which it was written must be ignored, or at a minimum, twisted in order to protect their beliefs, their dogma. It's a religious debate in form, if not in function.

And that's why I really do try to stay out of SA debates - they're a waste of time and effort.

mainly because the anti gun side's arguments are based on dishonesty. That side really isn't about stopping crime or mass shootings but rather imposing restrictions on honest gun owners for political reasons. It doesn't take a genius to know that if the penalties of 9 capital counts of murder doesn't scare someone, the penalty for having an illegal gun won't either. and for those who claim someone willing to sacrifice his own life to kill others will be deterred from finding a gun if they all were banned, one only has to look at prohibition or the war on drugs to realize what bovine excrement that argument is

the fact is, shooters like the one in question here are similar to the Japanese Kamikaze pilots of the latter stages of WWII. they are people who intend to die or at least don't worry about it. The only way to stop such people is to shoot them down before they kill too many people. The fear of punishment is irrelevant to them
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Gosh. It must be so hard to always be a victim.

I am well armed, I take measures against being a victim. what exactly does that comment have to do with this thread? Have you come up with any suggested changes in the law that would have prevented this massacre?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

LOL, you didn't read the article before you posted that, did you?

That's what it is about- that the right seeks to blame Muslims or blacks in general when individual Muslims or blacks do something horrible, but the right doesn't apply the same approach to whites. The headline, and the subtitle, are mocking right wing headlines about black and Muslim acts. For example "where are the white fathers" is one of the subtitles, which is a play on a Fox editorial "where are the black fathers" and so on
Okay, thanks for clarifying
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

It's simply the basic civilizational principle of the thing.


You don't need a handgun. Certainly the average Republican who advocates that they need guns who lives in an all-white rural area or suburban area certainly doesn't need a handgun.

You don't need an automatic-semi weapon. There is zero need for that.

Hunting rifles are the only logical thing that makes sense. No other legal gun makes any logical sense whatsoever from a civilizational point of measure.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

For all of you that are a little slow on the uptake... he intended to start a race war by shooting blacks, which would never work, but, ironically, Obama condemns his actions, yet has done more than this guy could ever dream to increase racial tensions and make things tougher for the black community.

I wonder if Obama allowed himself a little... nah.

Awesome. It's all Obama's fault. You have dismissed yourself outright in a most predictable yet accidentally funny style. Congrats!
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Republican gun logic is simply amazing from a pro gun "Libertarian" viewpoint.


"NO we can't have police having automatic weapons that's a police state!! And then "But random Lunatics should by ALL MEANS have easy access to automatic weapons and their ammos".
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

I am well armed, I take measures against being a victim. what exactly does that comment have to do with this thread? Have you come up with any suggested changes in the law that would have prevented this massacre?

Again...you need to recognize the problem before you formulate solutions.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

I am well armed, I take measures against being a victim. what exactly does that comment have to do with this thread? Have you come up with any suggested changes in the law that would have prevented this massacre?

Yes, I realize you are frightened and need to be armed. But victimhood manifests in many ways.
 
Back
Top Bottom