• 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]

I could not possibly disagree with you more vehemently.



You can disagree all you want...but the media is the problem. Stop paying attention to their sensationalism.



Good. But realize that not all whites can say this with a straight face.

Why can't they?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Well the shooter at the Navy Yard was black (the only blac spree killer I can think of) and I don't think anyone ever called him a thug, that was big mental illness conversation too

DC sniper was black as well

and then there was the Atlanta child killer-I believe the person claimed to be the killer-Wayne Williams or something like that was black. "thug" was originally a british term for indian killers based on a murder cult "Thuggee"
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

You can disagree all you want...but the media is the problem. Stop paying attention to their sensationalism.

If you are a white person, then you have the privilege to say that. You have the privilege of turning off the TV or staying away from news websites, and for you, the problem will go away.

Blacks do not have this privilege. Their lives are directly, negatively impacted by racism in media. So no, until that racism is acknowledged, addressed, and cure, then no, this issue is not going to go away.

Why can't they?

Well that is the million-dollar question! Why haven't they moved on from a time when we have been bombarded with messages, overt and covert, that blacks and Latinos are somehow "less than" whites, whether that comes to violence, money management, personal responsibility, or anything else?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Wanting to curb violence and actually curbing violence are not the same thing. Gun control has NEVER EVER EVER TIMES A BILLION curbed violence.

Except for all the times that it has. All one need do is look at the rest of the world. It's simple logic - if "an armed society is a polite society" as some want to claim, then the nations with the LEAST gun control would be the least violent, right? Right. But NOWHERE is this the case.

Conversely, if strong gun control leads to tyranny (as many DP gun 'enthusiasts' claim), then this should be the case in most (if not all) democracies that have strong EFFECTIVE gun control (as opposed to those nations which have strong gun control on the books, but such gun control is not enforced e.g. Mexico). But how many democracies which have strong effective gun control have devolved into tyranny? None that I can think of. And one cannot point to, say, those American cities which have strong gun control laws on the books, because those laws are not enforceable - all one need do is to bring a car full of guns legally bought the next state over.

In other words, anyone who claims that EFFECTIVE gun control never curbs violence, or that everyone having lots of guns does curb violence...simply isn't paying attention to the world around them. They are arguing against the reality of the RESULTS of effective gun control (or the lack thereof) in all the democracies of the world around us.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Except for all the times that it has. All one need do is look at the rest of the world. It's simple logic - if "an armed society is a polite society" as some want to claim, then the nations with the LEAST gun control would be the least violent, right? Right. But NOWHERE is this the case.

Conversely, if strong gun control leads to tyranny (as many DP gun 'enthusiasts' claim), then this should be the case in most (if not all) democracies that have strong EFFECTIVE gun control (as opposed to those nations which have strong gun control on the books, but such gun control is not enforced e.g. Mexico). But how many democracies which have strong effective gun control have devolved into tyranny? None that I can think of. And one cannot point to, say, those American cities which have strong gun control laws on the books, because those laws are not enforceable - all one need do is to bring a car full of guns legally bought the next state over.

In other words, anyone who claims that EFFECTIVE gun control never curbs violence, or that everyone having lots of guns does curb violence...simply isn't paying attention to the world around them. They are arguing against the reality of the RESULTS of effective gun control (or the lack thereof) in all the democracies of the world around us.

Yep, Gun Control has worked wonders in places like Baltimore, Detroit, Washington DC , St Louis and Chicago... .
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Except for all the times that it has. All one need do is look at the rest of the world. It's simple logic - if "an armed society is a polite society" as some want to claim, then the nations with the LEAST gun control would be the least violent, right? Right. But NOWHERE is this the case.

Conversely, if strong gun control leads to tyranny (as many DP gun 'enthusiasts' claim), then this should be the case in most (if not all) democracies that have strong EFFECTIVE gun control (as opposed to those nations which have strong gun control on the books, but such gun control is not enforced e.g. Mexico). But how many democracies which have strong effective gun control have devolved into tyranny? None that I can think of. And one cannot point to, say, those American cities which have strong gun control laws on the books, because those laws are not enforceable - all one need do is to bring a car full of guns legally bought the next state over.

In other words, anyone who claims that EFFECTIVE gun control never curbs violence, or that everyone having lots of guns does curb violence...simply isn't paying attention to the world around them. They are arguing against the reality of the RESULTS of effective gun control (or the lack thereof) in all the democracies of the world around us.

Taking all the guns away from law abiding mentally stable and legal gun owners isn't going to address this particular problem.

If you really want to address the problem of the crazed mentally unstable using guns to randomly kill people, keep guns out of their reach. That would be far more effective at dealing with the root causes of this particular problem.

Surely you can see the logic and common sense of this.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

If you are a white person, then you have the privilege to say that. You have the privilege of turning off the TV or staying away from news websites, and for you, the problem will go away.

Blacks do not have this privilege. Their lives are directly, negatively impacted by racism in media. So no, until that racism is acknowledged, addressed, and cure, then no, this issue is not going to go away.



Well that is the million-dollar question! Why haven't they moved on from a time when we have been bombarded with messages, overt and covert, that blacks and Latinos are somehow "less than" whites, whether that comes to violence, money management, personal responsibility, or anything else?

oh come on, that is silly.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Now wait a second. Just because we know that the attacker is likely a white male of a certain age, doesn't mean we should be racist a start profiling.

I posted this earlier in this thread sooo....

the gunman said: “I have to do it. You rape our women and you’re taking over our country. And you have to go.”​

You may continue with your version now.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Taking all the guns away from law abiding mentally stable and legal gun owners isn't going to address this particular problem.

If you really want to address the problem of the crazed mentally unstable using guns to randomly kill people, keep guns out of their reach. That would be far more effective at dealing with the root causes of this particular problem.

Surely you can see the logic and common sense of this.

none of the gun banners have ever come up with a program that would keep the mentally ill from getting guns while not banning good people from being armed. We also have to keep in mind the privacy concerns and concepts of privilege. If doctors were able to tell the authorities what their patients tell them so as to bar the patients from owning guns, this would create a chilling effect on people seeking mental health treatment.

Sadly, I doubt most gun banners really care about a real solution. They just use problems to justify banning guns from good people because that is their real motivation.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

oh come on, that is silly.

No, Turtle, it's not silly. It's reality.

And BTW. I urge you to choose the words in your replies on this matter more carefully. I've seen you step in it before, and this would be a good time not to.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Yet again your far right label for me is painfully inaccurate - I am quite moderate.

The problem with these damn shootings is that I have never seen an in-depth analysis delving into the actual causes.

In many cases, these morons aren't around to analyze, so the only evidence is based upon interviews with others and analysis of their computer files.

The Holmes trial looks to be a failure of his mental health providers, who seem to be covering their own assets to avoid culpability for their actions.

If there was truly insight into the cause of these clown's actions, then there would be some action items in place already - and that has not yet happened.

There will always be more than one cause.

Greetings, SMTA. :2wave:

:agree: Other than he is a mental case, which is obvious, what was the reason given for Jared Loughner's attempted murder of Representative Giffords in Tuscan, and actually murdering other innocent people that day? Obama stated that more mental health programs were needed - has he requested that?
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

No, Turtle, it's not silly. It's reality.

And BTW. I urge you to choose the words in your replies on this matter more carefully. I've seen you step in it before, and this would be a good time not to.

I will give your advice the amount of deference it deserves. and I tire of hearing how tough things are for blacks. Most of the problems facing blacks these days are caused by blacks. this shooting notwithstanding. because while we are discussing what appears to be an abominable racist attack on people who did absolutely nothing to deserve being shot down in a most cowardly and despicable fashion, dozens of blacks will be shot down in cowardly and despicable fashion by other blacks and that won't result in Obama speaking, the Attorney General speaking, or lots of discussions blaming this or that
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Except for all the times that it has. All one need do is look at the rest of the world. It's simple logic - if "an armed society is a polite society" as some want to claim, then the nations with the LEAST gun control would be the least violent, right? Right. But NOWHERE is this the case.

Conversely, if strong gun control leads to tyranny (as many DP gun 'enthusiasts' claim), then this should be the case in most (if not all) democracies that have strong EFFECTIVE gun control (as opposed to those nations which have strong gun control on the books, but such gun control is not enforced e.g. Mexico). But how many democracies which have strong effective gun control have devolved into tyranny? None that I can think of. And one cannot point to, say, those American cities which have strong gun control laws on the books, because those laws are not enforceable - all one need do is to bring a car full of guns legally bought the next state over.

In other words, anyone who claims that EFFECTIVE gun control never curbs violence, or that everyone having lots of guns does curb violence...simply isn't paying attention to the world around them. They are arguing against the reality of the RESULTS of effective gun control (or the lack thereof) in all the democracies of the world around us.

We already have effective gun control. What Democrats want is draconian gun control. Banning "that thing that goes up"? What the hell will that do? Little scumbag reloaded 5 damn times....what would the stupid mag capacity limits have done there? NOTHING! The FBI failed to name a SINGLE gun law that had a discernible effect on lowering crime. NOT ONE. So what makes you think that MORE laws would even do anything, except annoy the law abiding?

Arresting criminals and then the criminal justice system locking them away for a couple decades or longer is the best gun control. Not some stupid law that sounds good but doesnt work.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

If you are a white person, then you have the privilege to say that. You have the privilege of turning off the TV or staying away from news websites, and for you, the problem will go away.

Blacks do not have this privilege. Their lives are directly, negatively impacted by racism in media. So no, until that racism is acknowledged, addressed, and cure, then no, this issue is not going to go away.



Well that is the million-dollar question! Why haven't they moved on from a time when we have been bombarded with messages, overt and covert, that blacks and Latinos are somehow "less than" whites, whether that comes to violence, money management, personal responsibility, or anything else?

Please don't externalize your guilt feelings or extend paternalist concern to blacks. We are all responsible for ourselves.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

I will give your advice the amount of deference it deserves. and I tire of hearing how tough things are for blacks. Most of the problems facing blacks these days are caused by blacks. this shooting notwithstanding. because while we are discussing what appears to be an abominable racist attack on people who did absolutely nothing to deserve being shot down in a most cowardly and despicable fashion, dozens of blacks will be shot down in cowardly and despicable fashion by other blacks and that won't result in Obama speaking, the Attorney General speaking, or lots of discussions blaming this or that

Mass killings get a lot more attention than murders that just kill one or two people at a time, Turtle. You know that. And you need to see that you have the privilege of wanting not to hear about problems that blacks have to face that white don't, and the privilege of not acknowledging the true history of white supremacy in America. Here is what I mean:

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

Please don't externalize your guilt feelings or extend paternalist concern to blacks. We are all responsible for ourselves.

I do not know a single black person alive that would ever say such a thing.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

I do not know a single black person alive that would ever say such a thing.

You'll have to explain why that is not a non sequitur.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Mass killings get a lot more attention than murders that just kill one or two people at a time, Turtle. You know that. And you need to see that you have the privilege of wanting not to hear about problems that blacks have to face that white don't, and the privilege of not acknowledging the true history of white supremacy in America. Here is what I mean:



there is plenty of privilege for blacks. Obama and the current attorney general are two examples.
and this isn't about black vs white privilege. Its about some messed up stone cold killer who shot a bunch of innocent people for apparently no rational reason whatsoever. and using this killer as some sort of pawn to complain about how blacks are treated in this country is silly
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Mass killings get a lot more attention than murders that just kill one or two people at a time, Turtle. You know that. And you need to see that you have the privilege of wanting not to hear about problems that blacks have to face that white don't, and the privilege of not acknowledging the true history of white supremacy in America. Here is what I mean:

Why dont the 40 murders of blacks killing other blacks in one weekend in one city (Obamas so-called home town of Chicago) have dip**** mumbling on about gun laws?

Oh right...Chicago has VERY strict gun laws including an outright ban on handguns until very recently. I guess it just doesnt fit the narrative. And quite frankly I dont see why it would, no one cares when gang bangers cap other gang bangers.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Well the shooter at the Navy Yard was black (the only blac spree killer I can think of) and I don't think anyone ever called him a thug, that was big mental illness conversation too

He was the token black loon. ;)
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

You'll have to explain why that is not a non sequitur.

You'll have to explain why your comments alone telegraph you, with at least 95% certainty, that you are white.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Greetings, SMTA. :2wave:

:agree: Other than he is a mental case, which is obvious, what was the reason given for Jared Loughner's attempted murder of Representative Giffords in Tuscan, and actually murdering other innocent people that day? Obama stated that more mental health programs were needed - has he requested that?

Hey, PG.

More mental health programs is a very broad brush to paint with - cause must be identified first.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Why dont the 40 murders of blacks killing other blacks in one weekend in one city (Obamas so-called home town of Chicago) have dip**** mumbling on about gun laws?

Oh right...Chicago has VERY strict gun laws including an outright ban on handguns until very recently. I guess it just doesnt fit the narrative. And quite frankly I dont see why it would, no one cares when gang bangers cap other gang bangers.

Please cite for me the exact post in this thread where I called for further gun restrictions in light of this latest mass killing. My views are my views alone.

Heck, dig up my entire posting history if you want. I'll bet you'd have to go back years since I've said such a thing around here.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

Dude seriously, you know nothing of which you speak. Murdering someone at random cannot be a hate crime by definition. The vast majority of transracial murders are not charged as hate crimes, there's a substantial burden a prosecutor must met to prove that.

In most states it's not even a separate crime, just an aggravating factor

But it should be a slam dunk in SC since the police already labeled it a hate crime.

Hate crimes against white police officers in Ferguson, Mo and other cities are occurring all the time, with those perpetrators seeming swept under the rug, yet there will be a rush to convict this white kid for hate.
 
Re: Police: Multiple Victims in South Carolina church shooting [W:224]

You'll have to explain why your comments alone telegraph you, with at least 95% certainty, that you are white.

Of course I am. I have never claimed otherwise. You're still in non sequitur territory.
 
Back
Top Bottom