Petty White Nationalists

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 2:46 PM, John Robertson wrote:

On 2019/08/04 11:12 a.m., John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:42:43 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Just when you thought that Islamic terrorists were about as stupid as
it gets with their suicide attacks, we now have white supremacists
and all other manner of TrumpTarded idiots out there doing suicide
shootings.

  This country does not need gun control.

  We need to put gang members both black and white (and hispanic) in
prison, and the assholes who antagonize them (Donald J. Trump) as
well.

  We need more prisons so that the violent offenders we put there are
not being toothpaste squoze out the back door without serving due to
overcrowding.

Shooters are often first-time criminals. Gangs kill rivals but don't
shoot up WalMarts for no reason.

But there are a couple hundred murders in St Louis every year, and the
press doesn't care. Baltimore kills 45 in some months.


  We need to bring back the death penalty and actually carry the
fucking penalties out.  One year of appeals and you are done.
Period.

  Certain crimes should mean that the offender never gets to step
foot on free soil ever again.

  Superior? These stupid, society ruining fucks are not superior even
to a freshly laid turd.  Donald J. Trump included.

Someone might look for a common factor among the shooters. Video
games, too much strong weed, some other prescription or street drugs,
vaping, whatever. Some things make some people paranoid and violent.


You do know recent US history, don't you?

For a long time the CDC (Centre for Disease Control) was FORBIDDEN by
federal law to do research into gun related violence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/flawed-cdc-gun-violence-data-concerns-researchers/


https://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2013/02/gun-violence

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/12/health/gun-violence-research-cdc.html

Finally in June of this year (2019) the House votes to fund research:

https://gunsandamerica.org/story/19/06/19/house-votes-to-fund-gun-violence-research-for-the-first-time-in-decades/


Let's hope the Senate or someone else doesn't cancel the funding...

Other developed countries have the same video games, etc that you
mentioned but look at the differences in gun related violence - that is
what the CDC needs to look into - basic research.

John

they've been trying to find a causative link between video games and/or
violent media and youth violence/crime for ages they never do. if
anything they find they're negatively correlated.

I think the "mental illness" if that's what you want to call it (you
could easily self-define all mass murderers as 'mentally ill' I suppose
it's somewhat of a meaningless term when applied to premeditated violent
crime) that spurs incidents like this is already well under progression
and partially fixed before a child even starts playing "hard" video
games with violent aspects.

It probably tends to come from an environment of abuse and neglect, and
deprivation of proper nurturing and lack of good
parenting/mentoring/leadership. A child who has been raised in an
environment like that cannot be easily turned into a monster by a game.

Children are not nearly as susceptible to suggestion and manipulation by
media as it's imagined I don't believe, same as adults. In my experience
humans tend to be stubborn and resistant to change, both positive and
negative. The quality (or lack thereof) of the home environment and peer
group is I think the most important environmental factor.



"And it seems like the media immediately points a finger at me
So I point one back at 'em, but not the index or pinkie
Or the ring or the thumb, it's the one you put up
When you don't give a fuck, when you won't just put up
With the bullshit they pull, 'cause they full of shit too
When a dude's getting bullied and shoots up his school
And they blame it on Marilyn and the heroin
Where were the parents at? And look where it's at!"

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 5:14:17 PM UTC-4, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Sun, 04 Aug 2019 11:12:19 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

But there are a couple hundred murders in St Louis every year, and the
press doesn't care. Baltimore kills 45 in some months.



"The most recent homicide data from the FBI (2017) shows the city of
Baltimore with a homicide rate of 55.8 per 100,000 population.That's a
homicide rate comparable to El Salvador (60 per 100,000) and Venezuela
(56 per 100,000). Baltimore has more homicides per capita than Honduras,
Guatemala, South Africa, and Brazil.

In other words, Baltimore's homicide problem is worse than those in many
of the world's most violent countries."

https://tinyurl.com/yydhxarl

And you get all these damn fools ignoring the real statistics and blaming
everything on "white nationalists" - whatever that means.

I don't see anyone blaming everything on white nationalists. I do see
a lot of people correctly pointing out that the El Paso murders were
carried out by a white supremacist. Do some cities, eg Chicago,
Baltimore, Detroit, have high murder rates? Sure, but that doesn't
excuse or make a true mass murder like we just saw in two other low
crime cities less horrific. And most of those high crime cities, it's
gang bangers and other criminals killing each other, they aren't walking
into stores and killing 20 shoppers.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 5:35 PM, Whoey Louie wrote:

Maybe we need to tone down the horrible rhetoric? Trump started his
campaign by smearing most illegal aliens as a bunch of rapists, murderers
and drug runners. Just this week, he was lying away in Ohio, claiming
that with the existing immigration lottery countries are sending criminals.
"Here's a murderer!, here's a rapist, this one I better not say...."
It's all lies. Countries aren't sending them, people are applying from
those countries and if they are chosen, they are vetted just like any other
legal immigrant before being granted entry. With a president spewing those
lies and hate, maybe we should look there as a motivating factor for El Paso?

Trump administration the kind of administration that would "deal" with
the problem of white nationalist violence by allowing the Mossad to
operate freely on US soil.

extra-judicial assassinations at mosques would increase 800% "you might
be surprised how many white nationalists hang out there!"

 

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:0d40872c-3f8f-4122-
893e-1accc4f53bec@googlegroups.com:

> The overwhelming number of Americans disagree.

Now you are going to claim to know statistical fact.

This claim here proves you are 100% full of shit.

 

mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:fbee9eb5-363a-49ef-97bc-4a457d8b9559@googlegroups.com:

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at 4:30,
with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried, we see a
lot less of this shit?

Maybe you should just go at 4:20 instead, and simply have a toke or
two prior to going.

 

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in
news:2uH1F.46875$KR4.30714@fx31.iad:

they've been trying to find a causative link between video games
and/or violent media and youth violence/crime for ages they never
do. if anything they find they're negatively correlated.

This is true. For the last few decades.

Nowadays... not so sure that kids are not, because they are not
being raised the same/right at all.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, August 5, 2019 at 6:58:43 AM UTC+10, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 4:28:07 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

I agree John.
Some percentage of this is likely attributable to advances in modern medicine.
Instead of locking crazy people up, where they would have no access to guns, we put them on meds and delude ourselves into thinking they will always be safe, productive members of society.

While I'm sure that's true in most cases, it only takes a few whack-jobs, or folks off their meds, to account for mass-murder. And perhaps, the meds have side effects that are even worse than being crazy. All driven by profits.

And, as a gun-owner, it pisses me off every time someone suggests we need more or better "gun control". No we don't.

You do. Practically everywhere else has beter - tighter - gun control, and many fewer mass shootings.

> If we did, we'd confiscate everyone's automobiles too, and for the same false premise.

You wouldn't confiscate everyone's automobile. You'd look carefully at everyone who wanted to buy an automobile and screen out people who looked as if the they were likely to use them to kill other people (who wouldn't like it at all).

Taking away everyone's automobile would be acfting on a false premise - which makes this a straw man argument.

> Some idiot runs into a school bus full of children, and somehow taking my car is going to help fix that?

Obviously not. It might be cost-effective for somebody who was under treatment for paranoia.

> (Just substitute vehicle for gun, while simultaneously realizing that driving is a privilege while owning a firearm is a Constitutional right!)

The US constitution is a document written by fallible humans. It has been amended. The second amendment wasn't an improvement.

Yes. It is sad when bad things happen.
Maybe there are just too many damn people?
(Twice as many as when I was born -- so maybe 2X the number of incidents?)
I'm just talking out loud.... No need to fact check it.

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at 4:30, with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried, we see a lot less of this shit?

The evidence from other countries is that where fewer shoppers carry, there's a whole lot less of this shit.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Monday, August 5, 2019 at 4:12:28 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:42:43 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

<snip>

Someone might look for a common factor among the shooters. Video
games, too much strong weed, some other prescription or street drugs,
vaping, whatever. Some things make some people paranoid and violent.

The obvious common factor is that they have guns.

Places with better gun control legislation have many fewer shooters who actually kill people. Australia comes to mind.

Making people apply for gun licenses and making them keep their guns locked up when they aren't actually being used does seem to be effective in keeping them out of the hands of people who might go postal.

It won't stop people getting shot, but in Australia at least it made it a whole lot less likely. Europe has made the same sort of choices, with much the saem sort of effect.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in
news:t_K1F.107495$qC7.12463@fx11.iad:

On 8/4/19 8:04 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:fbee9eb5-363a-49ef-97bc-4a457d8b9559@googlegroups.com:

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at
4:30, with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried,
we see a lot less of this shit?

Maybe you should just go at 4:20 instead, and simply have a
toke or
two prior to going.


As if nobody in a Wal Mart in El Paso, TEXAS, was carrying.

when this guy come in, in a vest or body armor and a rifle
blasting away I bet I know what they did, they dove behind the
nearest solid-looking object or hauled their ass out the nearest
exit if one was available.

Seems like an excellent plan to me, if they weren't hit in the
first volley and made one of those moves right away they probably
lived.

I'd put one in his skull from 50 feet with a pistol.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 4:58 PM, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 4:28:07 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

I agree John.
Some percentage of this is likely attributable to advances in modern medicine.
Instead of locking crazy people up, where they would have no access to guns, we put them on meds and delude ourselves into thinking they will always be safe, productive members of society.

While I'm sure that's true in most cases, it only takes a few whack-jobs, or folks off their meds, to account for mass-murder. And perhaps, the meds have side effects that are even worse than being crazy. All driven by profits.

1) they never just locked people up forever for being mentally ill, even
in the "bad old days"

2) the diagnosed mentally ill commit violent crime at rates far below
the population average, medicated or not. They are mostly a danger to
themselves with firearms, and rarely to others.

3) the number of mass shooters who were diagnosed with something by
mental health professionals, or were on psychiatric medication at the
time, or even have a significant criminal record or history of
psychiatric hospitalization is extremely small.

It's pretty difficult to get committed or diagnosed with a mental
illness against one's will in the United States. People end up in the
mental health system because they either commit serious crime, attempt
suicide or say they are, or because they sign up to be treated
voluntarily because they have enough insight to understand they should
probably "get help." mental health patients with some insight tend not
to be violent.

guys who become mass shooters rarely sign up to be treated voluntarily,
they don't believe anything is "wrong" with them, and unless they commit
a serious crime or attempt suicide or say they're going to do those
things nobody can force them to go.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 4:58 PM, mpm wrote:

On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 4:28:07 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:

I agree John.
Some percentage of this is likely attributable to advances in modern medicine.
Instead of locking crazy people up, where they would have no access to guns, we put them on meds and delude ourselves into thinking they will always be safe, productive members of society.

While I'm sure that's true in most cases, it only takes a few whack-jobs, or folks off their meds, to account for mass-murder. And perhaps, the meds have side effects that are even worse than being crazy. All driven by profits.

And, as a gun-owner, it pisses me off every time someone suggests we need more or better "gun control". No we don't.

If we did, we'd confiscate everyone's automobiles too, and for the same false premise. Some idiot runs into a school bus full of children, and somehow taking my car is going to help fix that? (Just substitute vehicle for gun, while simultaneously realizing that driving is a privilege while owning a firearm is a Constitutional right!)

Yes. It is sad when bad things happen.
Maybe there are just too many damn people?
(Twice as many as when I was born -- so maybe 2X the number of incidents?)
I'm just talking out loud.... No need to fact check it.

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at 4:30, with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried, we see a lot less of this shit?

Damn it, old timer, get your fool head down before it gets blown off! Jeez!

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 8:04 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:fbee9eb5-363a-49ef-97bc-4a457d8b9559@googlegroups.com:

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at 4:30,
with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried, we see a
lot less of this shit?

Maybe you should just go at 4:20 instead, and simply have a toke or
two prior to going.

As if nobody in a Wal Mart in El Paso, TEXAS, was carrying.

when this guy come in, in a vest or body armor and a rifle blasting away
I bet I know what they did, they dove behind the nearest solid-looking
object or hauled their ass out the nearest exit if one was available.

Seems like an excellent plan to me, if they weren't hit in the first
volley and made one of those moves right away they probably lived.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 9:25 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in
news:t_K1F.107495$qC7.12463@fx11.iad:

On 8/4/19 8:04 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:fbee9eb5-363a-49ef-97bc-4a457d8b9559@googlegroups.com:

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at
4:30, with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried,
we see a lot less of this shit?

Maybe you should just go at 4:20 instead, and simply have a
toke or
two prior to going.


As if nobody in a Wal Mart in El Paso, TEXAS, was carrying.

when this guy come in, in a vest or body armor and a rifle
blasting away I bet I know what they did, they dove behind the
nearest solid-looking object or hauled their ass out the nearest
exit if one was available.

Seems like an excellent plan to me, if they weren't hit in the
first volley and made one of those moves right away they probably
lived.

I'd put one in his skull from 50 feet with a pistol.

lol

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 9:25 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

bitrex <user@example.net> wrote in
news:t_K1F.107495$qC7.12463@fx11.iad:

On 8/4/19 8:04 PM, DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:
mpm <mpmillard@aol.com> wrote in
news:fbee9eb5-363a-49ef-97bc-4a457d8b9559@googlegroups.com:

I'll say this:
Whenever I go to Walmart, I have a Glock-19 holstered IWB at
4:30, with one in the chamber. Maybe if more shoppers carried,
we see a lot less of this shit?

Maybe you should just go at 4:20 instead, and simply have a
toke or
two prior to going.


As if nobody in a Wal Mart in El Paso, TEXAS, was carrying.

when this guy come in, in a vest or body armor and a rifle
blasting away I bet I know what they did, they dove behind the
nearest solid-looking object or hauled their ass out the nearest
exit if one was available.

Seems like an excellent plan to me, if they weren't hit in the
first volley and made one of those moves right away they probably
lived.

I'd put one in his skull from 50 feet with a pistol.

Remember that time Jim Thompson posted some pics of his targets from the
range with the subject like "A MESSAGE TO ALL LEFTISTS" I showed them to
a 25 y/o girl in the Army Reserve, she just laughed for like 20 seconds

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 8:26 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:

On Monday, August 5, 2019 at 4:12:28 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:42:43 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

snip

Someone might look for a common factor among the shooters. Video
games, too much strong weed, some other prescription or street drugs,
vaping, whatever. Some things make some people paranoid and violent.

The obvious common factor is that they have guns.

Places with better gun control legislation have many fewer shooters who actually kill people. Australia comes to mind.

Making people apply for gun licenses and making them keep their guns locked up when they aren't actually being used does seem to be effective in keeping them out of the hands of people who might go postal.

It won't stop people getting shot, but in Australia at least it made it a whole lot less likely. Europe has made the same sort of choices, with much the saem sort of effect.

ahem "going postal" is a pejorative term I have friends in the US postal
industry and in my experience they are generally very dedicated, if
occasionally surly, professionals. you might be surly from time to time
too if you had to deliver mail to Americans all day

 

[Tom Del Rosso]

John Larkin wrote:

Some poor countries make their crazy murderers use knives, which are
less efficient killers.

Several years ago there were 6 murders in one incident, 3 with a gun and
3 with a knife. Gun control advocates actually spoke out with
indignation about the "3 people killed." It was bizarre to hear them
say that but they did.

 

[Whoey Louie]

On Sunday, August 4, 2019 at 8:06:07 PM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Whoey Louie <trader4@optonline.net> wrote in news:0d40872c-3f8f-4122-
893e-1accc4f53bec@googlegroups.com:

The overwhelming number of Americans disagree.

Now you are going to claim to know statistical fact.

This claim here proves you are 100% full of shit.

I do know the statistics, here are some examples:


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-florida-shooting-anniversary-poll/americans-support-gun-control-but-doubt-lawmakers-will-act-reuters-ipsos-poll-idUSKCN1PX11I



NEW YORK (Reuters) - Most Americans want tougher gun laws but have little confidence their lawmakers will take action, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Friday ahead of the one-year anniversary of the country’s deadliest high school shooting.

According to the poll, 69 percent of Americans, including 85 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of Republicans, want strong or moderate restrictions placed on firearms.



https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/28/gun-control-polling-parkland-430099

POLITICO/Morning Consult Poll
Gun control support surges in polls

By STEVEN SHEPARD

02/28/2018 05:46 AM EST

Updated 02/28/2018 07:27 AM EST
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter

Support for stricter gun laws has spiked in polls conducted after the fatal South Florida school shooting, hitting its highest level in at least a quarter-century.

Roughly 2 in 3 Americans now say gun control laws should be made more strict in the wake of the murder of 17 people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, according to a number of polls, including a new POLITICO/Morning Consult poll that shows support for stricter gun laws among registered voters at 68 percent, compared with just 25 percent who oppose stricter gun laws.



And note that what you posted:

" This country does not need gun control."

implies you think there should be no gun control.

So, clearly most Americans disagree, they actually want more gun control.



Wrong, always wrong.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 14:30:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

On 8/4/19 2:12 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Sun, 4 Aug 2019 15:42:43 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

Just when you thought that Islamic terrorists were about as stupid as
it gets with their suicide attacks, we now have white supremacists
and all other manner of TrumpTarded idiots out there doing suicide
shootings.

This country does not need gun control.

We need to put gang members both black and white (and hispanic) in
prison, and the assholes who antagonize them (Donald J. Trump) as
well.

We need more prisons so that the violent offenders we put there are
not being toothpaste squoze out the back door without serving due to
overcrowding.

Shooters are often first-time criminals. Gangs kill rivals but don't
shoot up WalMarts for no reason.

But there are a couple hundred murders in St Louis every year, and the
press doesn't care. Baltimore kills 45 in some months.


We need to bring back the death penalty and actually carry the
fucking penalties out. One year of appeals and you are done.
Period.

Certain crimes should mean that the offender never gets to step
foot on free soil ever again.

Superior? These stupid, society ruining fucks are not superior even
to a freshly laid turd. Donald J. Trump included.

Someone might look for a common factor among the shooters. Video
games, too much strong weed, some other prescription or street drugs,
vaping, whatever. Some things make some people paranoid and violent.



I think the common factor is they thought society owed them something
for being white.

Except for the ones that weren't white.

I suspect some other common factor. Blaming whatever won't help.




--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

lunatic fringe electronics

 

[bitrex]

On 8/4/19 8:49 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

Some poor countries make their crazy murderers use knives, which are
less efficient killers.

Several years ago there were 6 murders in one incident, 3 with a gun and
3 with a knife. Gun control advocates actually spoke out with
indignation about the "3 people killed." It was bizarre to hear them
say that but they did.

A civil society will find a way to make peace with guns, and an un-civil
society will find a way to make war with knives.

The United States in aggregate tends to not be strongly one thing or the
other.

 

[bitrex]

On 8/5/19 11:54 AM, bitrex wrote:

I think the common factor is they thought society owed them something
for being white.

Except for the ones that weren't white.

I suspect some other common factor. Blaming whatever won't help.





They overwhelmingly tend to be and number of them leave behind
pre-shooting writing which speaks to their entitled mentality.

As an example:

https://medium.com/editorials-on-current-events/i-read-the-elliot-rodger-manifesto-so-you-dont-have-to-b0b66c629ca5


Instead of hunting zebras why not take it from the "horse's mouth" so to
speak? The guy in the example above lays out his motivations.

Ted Bundy was a sociopath who lied about everything, but these
terrorists are a different type of disordered and I think have little
motivation to confabulate, as they rarely expect to even survive.

Similarly Osama Bin Laden wrote as to the reasons for him organizing the
9/11 attacks and detailed his thoughts on the matter. And his writing
was mostly ignored, and politicians and yes, the media, tended to
confabulate some other reasons involving hating America/Americans,
hating the abstract concept of "freedom", hating Christianity, bla bla
blah.

None of which Bin Laden talked about in his own manifesto, he never
spoke to hating the American people in their entirety, or hating
"freedom" as an abstract concept.

I think he also didn't expect to survive so had little reason to lie.
Searching for answers seems like a strange thing to do when reasons are
already in hand. and just because the reasons given often don't make
much sense to people who aren't themselves terrorists I don't think
immediately implies there are better ones waiting to be discovered,
somewhere.