quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


It depends on perspective. For a white guy living in Idaho

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


It depends on perspective. For a white guy living in Idaho -- ISIS is the the "real" threat. For a black woman living in the South, there's another more pressing threat.

No Sanctuary in Charleston

And for a while things were good. But then Trayvon Martin was gunned down in Florida, and almost instantly black people seemed to be under attack. Then came the police shootings of Michael Brown, Tamir Rice and Walter Scott — just a few miles away, in North Charleston — revealing the threat of violence we face every day. And this month we saw the footage of teenagers being manhandled by the police in Texas and Ohio.

The shooter’s reported words to his victims reflect a deep-seated hatred for, and fear of, black people by many Americans. These vitriolic sentiments underscore the way we are stereotyped in the media, demonized and dehumanized by right-wing pundits, policed by law enforcement and terrorized by those who use Stand Your Ground to cut us down without a second thought.

This daily threat of terror does not exist within a vacuum. It looms within the growing prison-industrial state, against the backdrop of school-reform debates, our slow movement toward gun reform and the political maneuvers by Republicans to make it increasingly more difficult for poor people and minorities to vote. The reality that our civil rights are under attack is just as heavy as our fear for our lives.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/19/opinion/no-sanctuary-in-charleston.html?ref=international&_r=0

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

No. When the phrase is "isolated act," it's not referring to the person committing the acts, but the act itself. A lone gunman can still commit acts that aren't isolated, if they're part of a pattern of acts. I think it's established that he's a lone gunman.

CloudBoy's (and I rarely defend his statements) statement was that it wasn't an "isolated incident," but rather just another incident in a pattern of either "terrorism or racism."

We will have to wait to see how this all shakes out, and, hopefully, find out why this guy acted in such an evil manner.

No. Youve learned to not defend cloudboy for a reason. If an act is coordinated, then its not an isolated act. If its one person doing something on his own, without help or outside planning, then its considered 'isolated'.

Heres a press conference about a police shooting in Vegas. The sheriff there called the shooting "an isolated act" which, by your definition, means thats the only police shooting there ever was

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
No. When the phrase is "isolated act," it's not referring to the person committing the acts, but the act itself. A lone gunman can still commit acts that aren't isolated, if they're part of a pattern of acts. I think it's established that he's a lone gunman.
CloudBoy's (and I rarely defend his statements) statement was that it wasn't an "isolated incident," but rather just another incident in a pattern of either "terrorism or racism."
We will have to wait to see how this all shakes out, and, hopefully, find out why this guy acted in such an evil manner.

No. Youve learned to not defend cloudboy for a reason. If an act is coordinated, then its not an isolated act. If its one person doing something on his own, without help or outside planning, then its considered 'isolated'.
Heres a press conference about a police shooting in Vegas. The sheriff there called the shooting "an isolated act" which, by your definition, means thats the only police shooting there ever was

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
On the evidence available now, Roof is a terrorist, a domestic white far right racist terrorist.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
On the evidence available now, Roof is a terrorist, a domestic white far right racist terrorist.

Where do you get that he is "far right?"

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

Therein lies the problem. There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy, just as there are those who will accuse others of attempting to gain political capital out of a tragedy, in an effort to thwart prevention of future outrages.

How do you tell the difference?

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD
The real problem here isn't guns, or if bombs would be more lethal or what constitutes terrorism. It is racism and mental health and total disregard for the law. Many times emotional instability is hard to detect, particularly by family that wants to not see it. In this case the uncle tried to straighten him out so he saw it. The kid selling mind altering drugs shows disregard for the law and increases the indications of mental problems. The fathers willingness to lie on the background check (a felony) shows that not just the kid but the family had no regard for the law, or for anything but what they wanted. Add a fixation with race and boom!
People need to be aware of signs of mental problems without being paranoid.
When this sort of thing happens, hopefully before a murder, we need to "teach" respect for the law, either by the family or the law.
And most of all we need to address racism. Problem here is that we are only supposed to talk about it as a one way street. To make progress we have to acknowledge black racism as well as white. If we don't do this we not only will not do anything about black racism but the denial of it's existence feeds and excuses white racism. Don't anyone pretend that I'm excusing white racists I am just addressing the facts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

The polarization that happen on threads here is a much smaller scale of what is happening in America where these crimes are being commited. So much anger at someone else. I just don't comprehend it. Because they are: 'insert hated person or people'
White
Black
Gay
Straight
Left Winged Liberal
Right Winged Conservative
Democrat
Republican
Christian, Wiccan, Muslim, Jewish etc and so on via religions
Short
Tall
Fat
Thin

You get the drift. If people here can't even discuss an issue without annoying each other, what makes us believe that others who do not agree with any other group will? Now add in radical beliefs that your group or people are superior to others, a mental health issue, and some guns and it's a hate crime in the making.

We are doomed as a society........

I absolutely agree with you. But may I add a couple of points. It's not the conservative side that has made up rules of what you may or may not say in public. It's not the conservative side that invents "triggers" that must not be broached and never discussed. It's not the conservative side that makes these things so that they can control people and speech. What we are doing here is after years of being stifled in public saying we'll not put up with that sort of BS anymore. The only way the divide can be resolved is discussion which PC speaking won't allow. So, I see that there will be a transition period where we take back our voice and stop allowing the only discussion to be voiced to be controlled by the liberal side.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Yep. Repeatedly blaming everything on the 'other side' usually denotes an inability to accept personal responsibility. It's part of the problem never part of the solution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity

quote:

ORIGINAL: cloudboy


This is as depraved as any massacre can be.

"Depraved" meaning the act of someone who has been diagnosed with psychiatric disorders? Someone who is essentially insane?

Ever heard of tardive dyskinesia

It is a common side effect of certain psyche meds





The following symptoms can be signs of tardive dyskinesia: ...Protruding the tongue involuntarily.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: LipstickLeuger

The polarization that happen on threads here is a much smaller scale of what is happening in America where these crimes are being commited. So much anger at someone else. I just don't comprehend it. Because they are: 'insert hated person or people'
White
Black
Gay
Straight
Left Winged Liberal
Right Winged Conservative
Democrat
Republican
Christian, Wiccan, Muslim, Jewish etc and so on via religions
Short
Tall
Fat
Thin

You get the drift. If people here can't even discuss an issue without annoying each other, what makes us believe that others who do not agree with any other group will? Now add in radical beliefs that your group or people are superior to others, a mental health issue, and some guns and it's a hate crime in the making.

We are doomed as a society........

I absolutely agree with you. But may I add a couple of points. It's not the conservative side that has made up rules of what you may or may not say in public. It's not the conservative side that invents "triggers" that must not be broached and never discussed. It's not the conservative side that makes these things so that they can control people and speech. What we are doing here is after years of being stifled in public saying we'll not put up with that sort of BS anymore. The only way the divide can be resolved is discussion which PC speaking won't allow. So, I see that there will be a transition period where we take back our voice and stop allowing the only discussion to be voiced to be controlled by the liberal side.

I don't honestly don't think you can put all the blame on one faction or another that easily. They all have their ups and downs and make rules that are bad. So again, we can't agree on anything, but if people would just step up and say they screw up and choose to see we are actually all the same, things would change. I know, call me a dreamer...........

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

Therein lies the problem. There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy, just as there are those who will accuse others of attempting to gain political capital out of a tragedy, in an effort to thwart prevention of future outrages.

How do you tell the difference?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Repeatedly blaming everything on the 'other side' usually denotes an inability to accept personal responsibility.

Hold that thought. Which among the following explain why Dylann Roof was captured alive:

1. A Good Samaritan (white, if it matters) recognized him, alerted police, and followed him until the cops got there.
2. He was cooperative when stopped and didn't resist arrest.
3. White Privilege.

Hint

K.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA
Wait for the spin Peon. As Eric Holder says, never waste a good crisis. But the answer to your question is, we've seen this sort of thing before and know how it will play out. Yes, that is what you on the left do.

Rahm Emanuel said that.

Hmm. I do see what I feel to be a suspicious tendency to forestall any effort towards useful change towards preventing such outrages in the future by means of a two-pronged 'attack': one, to lament - loudly and ostentatiously; two, to accuse those who call for changes of 'trying to make political capital out of a tragedy'.

Therein lies the problem. There are those that will use any means they feel they can to push through politically divisive legislation on the back of a tragedy, just as there are those who will accuse others of attempting to gain political capital out of a tragedy, in an effort to thwart prevention of future outrages.

How do you tell the difference?

Perhaps by having an honest conversation about the tragedy, the various factors that contributed to it and open-minded assessments of the various options advanced to thwart similar tragedies occurring in the future. An intention by all sides to listen and hear others would be enormously beneficial, as would honest declarations of interest by those with interests in the outcome.

To me, that seems a far more productive strategy that an automatic retreat to pre-existing dogmatic positions which is what happens at the moment.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

So you are abandoning your knee jerk "the gun made him do it"