Mass Shooting at Walmart in El Paso

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

We are not talking about regular firearm homicides between one-three participants, usually related to robberies and gang violence. 

We have talked about various things in this thread, including mass murders (with USA now having 251 and Norway having 1) and gun homicides (with USA having a rate of 44.5 and Norway having a rate of 0.1). Welcome to the discussion!

[action]

6 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

 

P.S. I called @DieselDaisy petty because he seems interested in derailing this serious topic into a means of taking cheapshots at SoulMonster.

well, it's not like you are soul's mom aren't you?

From where I sit, both diesel ànd soul do a pretty good job at throwing jabs at each other, in a curiously harmonic fashion. Derailing? Perhaps. entertaining? most certainly. But to lay the blame with one party (or rather - "not" with soul) just makes you a member of his fanclub I guess

Edited August 7, 2019 by action

[DieselDaisy]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

We have talked about various things in this thread, including mass murders (with USA now having 251 and Norway having 1) and gun homicides (with USA having a rate of 44.5 and Norway having a rate of 0.1). Welcome to the discussion!

Some ''one''. 77 dead!

I wasn't just discussing Norway though,

- 2016 Munich shooting (Breivik copycat, 9 people deal)

- 2015 Graz attack (anti-Turks, 9 dead)

- 2011, Breivik (77)

- 2011 Liège attack (6)

- 2011 Alphen aan den Rijn shopping mall shooting (Holland)

- 2010, Cumbria (12 dead, 11 injured)

etc.

If you go beyond Europe, there is Christchurch, 2019 (51 dead!).

It is obviously better than the United States's record but it isn't that impressive, if we are to believe that prohibiting firearms is the be all and end all to these type of massacres.

[SoulMonster]

11 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

It is obviously better than the United States's record but it isn't that impressive, if we are to believe that prohibiting firearms is the be all and end all to these type of massacres.

But who is saying we should believe that? It is a ridiculous thing to believe. The argument is not that reducing guns will be the end to such massacres, but that we will reduce them. And at the danger of sounding "smug" and "elitist" (!), I will have to say that we know this from data and comparative studies, and, well, common sense. 

I can't help myself: You know I am right. Simply right. As I type this out I sit at the corporation's international headquarters with the rest of my elite buddies, making fun of the have-nots. And I got my peeps with me, too. All of them. The entire fanclub. I am right. And you are wrong.

Edited August 7, 2019 by SoulMonster

[DieselDaisy]

12 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

But who is saying we should believe that? It is a ridiculous thing to believe. The argument is not that reducing guns will be the end to such massacres, but that we will reduce them. And at the danger of sounding "smug" and "elitist" (!), I will have to say that we know this from data and comparative studies, and, well, common sense. 

I can't help myself: You know I am right. Simply right. As I type this out I sit at the corporation's international headquarters with the rest of my elite buddies, making fun of the have-nots. And I got my peeps with me, too. All of them. The entire fanclub. I am right. And you are wrong.

I was referring to your general demeanour which is one of elitist European centre-left smugness and disdain for darn tootin' simple folk who might have the audacity to vote Trump and own a few guns or be religious (or vote Brexit). Example?

On 8/3/2019 at 9:49 PM, SoulMonster said:

Although I do think you have a point when you imply that Americans are simply more deranged than people in just about every other country in the world (and may I present exhibit A, President Donald Trump), I also think that perhaps the ridiculous amounts of guns permeating US society combined with a failing judicial system, a culture of violence and fear, and having succeeded at the incredible feat of filling their senate with humans who lack the courage to make hard choices that will fix the issue, is also part of the explanation. 

You have called them deranged. You have criticised their jurisprudence. You have claimed they live in a culture of ''violence and fear''. There is more than an simplification that their entire politics is broken also. You could have been a bit easier on the United States and simply shagged Uncle Sam's wife!

 

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, DieselDaisy said:

I was referring to your general demeanour which is one of elitist European centre-left smugness and disdain for darn tootin' simple folk who might have the audacity to vote Trump and own a few guns or be religious (or vote Brexit). Example?

You have called them deranged. You have criticised their jurisprudence. You have claimed they live in a culture of ''violence and fear''. There is more than an simplification that their entire politics is broken also. You could have been a bit easier on the United States and simply shagged Uncle Sam's wife!

Yes, electing Donald J. Trump as president is a good argument that USA isn't doing enough to fight mental disorders. I stand by that.

I have never expressed disdain for people who believe in god. For most part I pity them. Most of them can't help it. I have more disdain for those who enforce their own superstitions on their kids. That's the bad part. 

I have never expressed disdain for people owning guns. If you can own one and not shoot anyone, thumbs up! I actually have a gun myself, somewhere in the house. We took it apart and now we can't find all the pieces. True story. One day I suppose I will clean my youngest daughter's room and find a half-way assembled shotgun there 

And I don't have disdain for people voting Brexit. As I have said before, there are many faults with the EU. Genuine problems. I do disdain people of a certain kind though, who wanted out of the EU for idiotic, or racist, or because of past grudges, and with no concern over the effects such an event will have. 

And yes, I have criticised US' jurisprudence, or more precisely their gun laws. I find them willfully adequate to prevent Americans from shooting each other up. It is kind of the red thread in this discussion, too.

And yes, there do seem to be a significant culture of violence and fear in the USA, as evidenced by people arguing that they needs guns for home protection. I have made longer posts on this issue before. But there seems to be, on average, a higher willingness to go to acts of violence in USA than in most other comparable countries. 

Their politics is broken? No shit  With the gerrymeandering and flawed democracy and focus on star quality and celebrity status , etc etc. Hardly a bombshell.

But almost all of this is entirely irrelevant to this thread, and just you being butthurt over things I have said before. The topic at hand is how we can reduce gun homicides and mass murders in the US, and as a quick solution my argument, as almost anyone elses except Americans, is that they should enforce stricter gun laws. It works everywhere, and despite all the obvious faults of the American people, I am sure they are subject to the laws of logic just like anyone else.

[action]

18 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

Yes, electing Donald J. Trump as president is a good argument that USA isn't doing enough to fight mental disorders. I stand by that.

 

so it is the american people you target.

yet norwegians, as individuals, can't be called a bit hypocritical when it comes to blaming the USA for bad gun laws, when they elected the politicians that made inefficient gun laws in the first place?

you can't have it both ways, soulie. Either people of a nation can be blamed for a nation's decisions and leaders, or they can't. Which one of the two is it? It seems, if you're norwegian, you can't be blamed for bad gun laws made by elected politicians. But if you're an american, you're to be blamed for trump's actions since they elected him.

[Download]

Quick question: 

Is Donald J. Trump an authoritarian?  

[SoulMonster]

The American Psychological Association has released a statement on the mass murders, and more specifically a rebuttal to Trump's claim that the murderers are insane: https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2019/08/statement-shootings

Quote

Routinely blaming mass shootings on mental illness is unfounded and stigmatizing. Research has shown that only a very small percentage of violent acts are committed by people who are diagnosed with, or in treatment for, mental illness. The rates of mental illness are roughly the same around the world, yet other countries are not experiencing these traumatic events as often as we face them. One critical factor is access to, and the lethality of, the weapons that are being used in these crimes. Adding racism, intolerance and bigotry to the mix is a recipe for disaster. 

 

[action]

Just now, SoulMonster said:

The American Psychological Association has released a statement on the mass murders, and more specifically a rebuttal to Trump's claim that the murderers are insane: https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2019/08/statement-shootings

 

if "racism, intolerance and bigotry " is the recipe for disaster, then why not focus on those aspects? Hateful speech is posted on various internet sites, as we speak. Not a damn thing is done about it for the sake of our supposed human rights. While every crime starts, not with a gun, but with an idea. Banning guns is curing the symptons, not the disease.

[SoulMonster]

3 minutes ago, action said:

so it is the american people you target.

Eh, no, only those who voted for Trump, and only for the mistake of electing a racist moron.

 

5 minutes ago, action said:

yet norwegians, as individuals, can't be called a bit hypocritical when it comes to blaming the USA for bad gun laws, when they elected the politicians that made inefficient gun laws in the first place?

I don't buy the premise that Norway has "inefficient gun laws". Such a strange thing to claim. The fact that we have one of the lowest gun homicide rates would suggest differently. It seems like for most part, our gun laws work well. The fact that we have had one mass murder doesn't mean we have "inefficient gun laws". The fact that we have had only one mass murder suggests they are efficient. This is like bizzarro world.

And you are only hypocritical if you argue for something yet do the opposite yourself. So only those who actually voted for bad gun laws, and didn't regret it, could be said to be hypocritical for criticising others for voting for similarly bad gun laws. 

10 minutes ago, action said:

you can't have it both ways, soulie. Either people of a nation can be blamed for a nation's decisions and leaders, or they can't. Which one of the two is it? It seems, if you're norwegian, you can't be blamed for bad gun laws made by elected politicians. But if you're an american, you're to be blamed for trump's actions since they elected him.

But I have never blamed every American for electing Trump 

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, action said:

if "racism, intolerance and bigotry " is the recipe for disaster, then why not focus on those aspects? Hateful speech is posted on various internet sites, as we speak. Not a damn thing is done about it for the sake of our supposed human rights. While every crime starts, not with a gun, but with an idea. Banning guns is curing the symptons, not the disease.

This has been discussed already. Fixing "racism" is much harder than "reducing the availability of guns". That's why.

[action]

18 minutes ago, SoulMonster said:

This has been discussed already. Fixing "racism" is much harder than "reducing the availability of guns". That's why.

the easier way is not always the most efficient way.

I'm also not agreeing that fixing racism is harder, or reducing the availability of guns is easier. Guns are everywhere, in remote buildings, with extremist groups, criminals etc. Absolutely impossible to remove them all. the internet on the other hand, is a mouse click away.

it is my observation that these types of hate-crime, with online platforms full of racist posts (such as 8chan), online manifests by the murderers, live video feeds, are a phenomenon that was facilitated because of the internet. The internet is a controllable environment, see china and russia that heavily restrict access to the internet. If those countries can do that, how hard can it be to restrict access to these sites?

Edited August 7, 2019 by action

[action]

I mean, a fucking guns n roses song can be taken down within minutes, but an entire online platform can happily post away racist shit?

 

[Download]

1 hour ago, action said:

I mean, a fucking guns n roses song can be taken down within minutes, but an entire online platform can happily post away racist shit?

 

What do you suggest we do about the racist people? 

Should they be allowed freedom of speech? 

Should they be allowed to vote? 

Should they be allowed civil liberties? 

Should they be allowed to gather? 

Besides virtue signaling and claiming moral superiority, what the fuck is the endgame in dealing with racists? 

Should they be eliminated? 

 

[SoulMonster]

1 hour ago, action said:

the easier way is not always the most efficient way.

I'm also not agreeing that fixing racism is harder, or reducing the availability of guns is easier. Guns are everywhere, in remote buildings, with extremist groups, criminals etc. Absolutely impossible to remove them all. 

*sigh* No one is saying we need to "remove them all" to reduce gun violence. 

Out of curiosity, how do you think we should go about "fixing racism"? 

[DieselDaisy]

1 hour ago, SoulMonster said:

I don't buy the premise that Norway has "inefficient gun laws". Such a strange thing to claim. The fact that we have one of the lowest gun homicide rates would suggest differently. It seems like for most part, our gun laws work well. The fact that we have had one mass murder doesn't mean we have "inefficient gun laws". The fact that we have had only one mass murder suggests they are efficient. This is like bizzarro world.

Wonderful they are. Breivik obtained his 9 mm Glock 34 pistol by attending sessions at Oslo Pistol Club - NB., that hand guns have been banned in the United Kingdom since 1996-7 - and his Ruger Mini-14 rifle by possession of a hunting licence for deer. 

[SoulMonster]

6 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

Wonderful they are. Breivik obtained his 9 mm Glock 34 pistol by attending sessions at Oslo Pistol Club - NB., that hand guns have been banned in the United Kingdom since 1996-7 - and his Ruger Mini-14 rifle by possession of a hunting licence for deer. 

And? Still doesn't change the fact that our gun violence rate is among the lowest in the world, that except for Utøya we don't have mass murders in Norway, and that we responded to that atrocity by making semi-automatic weapons restricted. 

Truly bizarre to criticise a country that seems to have managed to reduce gun violence to record-low levels, for having lax gun laws. And in a world where it is impossible to eliminate the probability of mass murders by guns, having had one isn't really bad. 

But hey, this isn't about homicides, gun laws, Norway or USA, is it? Or common sense and logics. It is about you losing the ability to think when reading my posts. 

[Dazey]

2 hours ago, Download said:

Quick question: 

Is Donald J. Trump an authoritarian?  

He's a twat.

[Download]

1 hour ago, Oldest Goat said:

Sheesh. Save some pussy for the rest of us.

I see. So when asked to expound upon the rhetoric. It can’t be done. 

 

How about putting all the racists in jail? Or perhaps a chamber? 

How about a tax? You guys are fans of taxes, how about we charge them a tax so they can account for their racism... 

 

38 minutes ago, Dazey said:

He's a twat.

Feels bad you didn’t get your old white lady running the country. 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Download

[action]

1 hour ago, Download said:

What do you suggest we do about the racist people? 

Should they be allowed freedom of speech? 

Should they be allowed to vote? 

Should they be allowed civil liberties? 

Should they be allowed to gather? 

Besides virtue signaling and claiming moral superiority, what the fuck is the endgame in dealing with racists? 

Should they be eliminated? 

 

why are you acting all columbo over my issues over racism?

[Download]

32 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

 

Honestly, I think USA is fucked and destined for a civil war tbh. 

 

Isn’t it funny that the IQ decline began when liberals took over the education system? 

You're probably right about the US destined for a civil war. 

I wish the lefties good fortune in the wars to come. It will be a difficult task when they’re fighting with dildos and bongs. 

[Graeme]

7 hours ago, DieselDaisy said:

I didn't say you are prohibited (somebody prohibiting Soul Monster from speaking polemics, well really?). I said you open yourself up to charges of hypocrisy. Clearly Norway's gun regulations were not worth the paper they were printed on when Breivik obtained the weaponry he desired to commit a massacre which dwarfs the type of massacres we see in the United States. 

But continuing to focus on the Brevik thing as a point-scoring exercise against him doesn't really hold water when statistically speaking it was one massive outlier in Norway's history and what we're discussing in the US is a consistent and perpetuating trend.

[DieselDaisy]

19 minutes ago, Graeme said:

But continuing to focus on the Brevik thing as a point-scoring exercise against him doesn't really hold water when statistically speaking it was one massive outlier in Norway's history and what we're discussing in the US is a consistent and perpetuating trend.

I have already given other European examples as well as Christchurch.

[SoulMonster]

5 minutes ago, DieselDaisy said:

I have already given other European examples as well as Christchurch.

So every nation can be victims of mass murders? Got it. How enlightening of you. But how does this relate to the fact that the US have on average one mass murder every bloody day? Ah, now I remember it: Since we also have them it is hypocritical of us to suggest what the US can do to make theirs more rare, maybe even get it down to a level seen in comparable nations