Happy Holidays - 30 dead or wounded at parade

[Derec]

Doesn’t mean being a Bernie Bro had anything to do with it.

You don't think his decision to shoot himself some Republican congressmen had anything to do with his leftist politics?

How come you don’t apply the same sort of “ reasoning” and point out thus killer is a white guy?

Because being white is an accident of birth. Why are you always so obsessed with race? At least when you can blame white men for everything.

 

[Derec]

Weapons that allow an individual to cause mass deaths.

That is not helpful at all. You just used the same words in a different order. Let me try to reframe my question. What kind of weapons would you include?

 

[Derec]

What did the forefathers who wrote the constitution think arms were? Be honest.

My forefathers did not write the constitution.
But the writers were people of their time. Firearms were muskets. Press was literally lead letters smeared with ink and pressed against paper. Do you think constitutional rights are limited by the level of technology extant at the time of writing?

 

[Derec]

Something that ought to be well-regulated, for one.

No disagreement there. I am for stricter gun laws than we have now.

 

[Derec]

i'm sorry and where is the part where hitler converted germany's society into having the means of production owned by the masses instead of being in the hands of individuals?

Means of production were controlled by the state, even if they were nominally privately owned.

having the word 'socialist' in the name is literally the only thing socialist about the nazi party.

Question: how do you define socialism anyway? We never can get to any sort of agreement on that question on this forum.

also also, hitler never went on a public mass shooting rampage.

Well, he was a corporal in WWI, so maybe he did.

 

[Derec]

no, there isn't. i know you get off hallucinating that there is, but reality does not conform to your fantasies as much as i wish that it did in this case.

Of course there is. Denying it just makes you look silly.

no, there really isn't - because that would require there being political violence by the left in the first place.
actually, in the US that would require there to *be* a left in the first place and there functionally isn't.

#BLM is an extremist group founded by trained Marxist. Antifa is violent leftist group that can trace its roots to the paramilitary organ of the German Communist Party in the late 1920s.
Less recently there were the Weathermen, Black Panthers/Black Liberation Army, and many smaller group and such.

and here yet again as you have done countless times before, you demonstrate that you don't understand the difference between 'left wing violence' and 'violence that isn't right wing'.
i've debunked your incomprehensible insanity on this issue multiple times, i won't bother doing so again.

You even deny that there is a Left in the US. So any violence by the left must not be by the left, because there is no real left, even if it identifies as left. No True Scotsman is very convenient.

i will actually concede you are correct here on a technicality.
i should have said 'acts of random violence' which is distinctly different from 'random acts of violence.'

What's the difference in your mind?

but acts of violence on random targets for the purpose of carrying out some kind of ideological agenda = right wing violence. always. full stop.

There were plenty of random people attacked by #BLMers and Antifas during their rioting since 2014 and especially during the 2020 insurrection.
Here's a random motorist beat up by #BLM "peaceful protester" Marquise Love.
Here’s what we know about alleged attacker Marquise Love in Portland beatdown

'can' and 'do' are distinctly different, and the gulf between them in this case is insurmountable.

Both applies.

 

[Hermit]

...communism is the name for a political theory which posits that violent class warfare is required to attain socialism...

Communism is indeed the ownership of the means of production by the proletariat, but there was a relatively minor dispute between Vladimir Lenin and Yuliy Martov during the 2nd Congress of the RSDLP in 1903. By the time Alexander Kerensky tried to hold the quasi-liberal provisional Russian government together, this minor dispute had developed into a fundamental, irreconcilable difference about how to achieve communism. Lenin led one faction, known as the Bolsheviks, who insisted that it must involve the violent overthrow of the ruling classes. Martov's faction, the Mensheviks, were equally determined that only gradual reforms can result in a lasting communist society.

Now there were basically two communist parties. One, the Bolsheviks, aimed to reach the goal of communism on the battlefield. The locus of activity of the other, the Mensheviks, was the Russian parliament, the Duma. Communism was split between a revolutionary and a reformist branch. But there was another fork to come. For that we need to look at developments outside Russia. There were significant communist parties of the reformist kind in European countries. The largest and most powerful among them was Germany's SPD. In the 1912 federal election, the SPD won 34.8 per cent of votes and became the largest party in the Reichstag with 110 seats. It did officially subscribe to Marxist communism, but in praxis it was strictly of the reformist kind. At the outbreak of WWI, however it took a distinct lurch to the right in 1914, when it decided to adopt what it called Burgfriedenspolitik, basically a truce between its socialist aims and Germany's conflicting imperialistic war. Compromising its principles in such radical manner was not as nonsensical as it might seem. Opposition to the war could well result in the Party's expulsion from the German parliament, the Reichstag. The Kaiser could arrange that. Germany was still not a democracy. Opposition could also weaken Germany's war effort. If it lost, the country would come under the thumb of Tsar Nicolas, who was way more autocratic than Kaiser Wilhelm. There really was not much of a real choice.

Be it as it may, the reformist communist (socialist if you prefer that term) SPD subordinated its aspirations to the aims of the powers that were at the time. While the party expected this unfortunate situation to be temporary it turned out to be permanent. In the following decades its aim became limited to implementing socialist policies within a capitalist framework.

This has become a process - with variations determined by local circumstances - in other countries as well. So, now we have three forms of socialism - revolutionary socialism, reformist socialism and socialism within capitalism. The latter does not even pretend to aim for the ownership of the means of production by the proletariat any more. It contends that socialism has succeeded when the excesses and downsides of laissez faire capitalism have been minimised by regulations.

 

[Gospel]

What did the forefathers who wrote the constitution think arms were? Be honest.

My forefathers did not write the constitution.
But the writers were people of their time. Firearms were muskets. Press was literally lead letters smeared with ink and pressed against paper. Do you think constitutional rights are limited by the level of technology extant at the time of writing?

Absolutely not. It also wasn't meant to enumerate rights either thus the amendment everyone loves to ignore.

 

[Gospel]

Mass shootings as a number and not what the shooter intended. Maybe. But deliberately trying to kill as many random people as possible? That's the white community sir.

So not just selection bias, but also definition bias.
Do you have any actual numbers using your definition by the way?

So because we don't have a word for young white American males deliberately trying to kill a bunch of random people I'm not talking about something that exists?

 

[Gospel]

Anyhow, there are plenty of numbers available. but here's one as close to what I'm talking about as I can get.

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories

Persons who committed public mass shootings in the U.S. over the last half century were commonly troubled by personal trauma before their shooting incidents, nearly always in a state of crisis at the time, and, in most cases, engaged in leaking their plans before opening fire. Most were insiders...

nij.ojp.gov

Of the 172 individuals who engaged in public mass shootings covered in the database, 97.7% were male. Ages ranged from 11 to 70, with a mean age of 34.1. Those shooting were 52.3% White, 20.9% Black, 8.1% Latino, 6.4% Asian, 4.2% Middle Eastern, and 1.8% Native American.

Most individuals who perpetrated mass shootings had a prior criminal record (64.5%) and a history of violence (62.8%), including domestic violence (27.9%). And 28.5% had a military background. Most died on the scene of the public mass shooting, with 38.4% dying by their own hand and 20.3% killed by law enforcement officers.

[note 1] The Congressional Research Service has defined a public mass shooting as a “a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms”, not including the shooter(s), “within one event, and [where] at least some of the murders occurred in a public location or locations in close geographical proximity (e.g., a workplace, school, restaurant, or other public settings), and the murders are not attributable to any other underlying criminal activity or commonplace circumstance (armed robbery, criminal competition, insurance fraud, argument, or romantic triangle).”

Even without "selection bias" white people top the list. I'd like to give women the honorable mention of miraculously not making the list btw. But let's proceed to talk about how there are more white people living in America than Black, Latino, Asian, Middle Eastern & Native Americans as if that somehow makes the problem go away.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

What did the forefathers who wrote the constitution think arms were? Be honest.

My forefathers did not write the constitution.
But the writers were people of their time. Firearms were muskets. Press was literally lead letters smeared with ink and pressed against paper. Do you think constitutional rights are limited by the level of technology extant at the time of writing?

There is absolutely no reason to believe the 2nd Amendment is a blank check. In fact, we do have limits already in hand for 2nd Amendment restrictions. The real question should be, why are people intent on committing murder Constitutionally guaranteed the right to purchase guns to commit that murder?

 

[ZiprHead]

Two issues arose about Crimo. In 2019 he threatened to kill himself. Authorities were called and he was given mental health treatment. That same year, he threatened to kill "everybody". Police were again called. They removed 16 knives including a sword.

We really need red flag laws for stuff like that.

Illinois has a red flag law but it was enacted after these incidents.

Do we know where he got his rifle? If it was given to him by his parents, who must have known about his problems, they should be both criminally and civilly liable.

He personally bought his guns in the Chicago area.

 

[laughing dog]

Doesn’t mean being a Bernie Bro had anything to do with it.

You don't think his decision to shoot himself some Republican congressmen had anything to do with his leftist politics?

Possibly. Do you have anything besides your bias to support your conclusion?

Because being white is an accident of birth.

So? As Gospel points out, there seems to a high correlation with being a white male and a mass shooter. And correlation is your MO for drawing conclusions.

Why are you always so obsessed with race?

That's a laugh coming from you. Your first post in this thread brought up race.

At least when you can blame white men for everything.

There you go again - bringing up race with your false accusation, because I don't blame white men for everything -

 

[Politesse]

It's interesting how many family members (and cub scout mothers?) are still insisting that they "never saw any warning signs" whatsoever, and feel no responsibility for the results of buying this kid more and more weapons despite many incidents of his more or less openly threatening to kill everybody if he got them? This is an argument for, not against, govenrment regulation of firearm use. Obviously, we cannot govern ourselves in this respect. If the weapons in question empower a troubled kid to mow down dozens of innocent people and survive, the obvious failure of the plan to "keep things in the family" becomes a problem for more than just that family.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

CANADA!

The Illinois State Police confirmed on Tuesday that the father of the Highland Park parade shooting suspect sponsored his son’s application for a gun permit months after relatives reported that Robert E. Crimo III had threatened to “kill everyone,” and that authorities had “insufficient basis” to deny the application.


The revelation that Crimo, 21, had at least two previous encounters with law enforcement has raised new questions about how he was able to legally purchase his guns and whether more could have been done to prevent the massacre that killed seven people and injured more than 30.

In September 2019, a family member told Highland Park police that Crimo had threatened to “kill everyone,” said Christopher Covelli, a spokesman for the Lake County Major Crime Task Force. Officers visited Crimo’s home and confiscated 16 knives, a dagger and a sword, but made no arrest, Covelli said on Tuesday, because they lacked probable cause. However, they notified Illinois State Police, he said.

Months later, in December, Crimo applied for a firearm owner’s identification card, the document required to possess a gun in Illinois. Because Crimo was under 21 at the time, state law required him to have the consent of a parent or guardian before he could own a firearm or ammunition. According to state police, which issues the cards, Crimo’s father sponsored the permit application.

link

You've got to be fucking kidding me. His fucking dad sponsored the application?! Bad enough the system didn't catch it, but a person who should have been very aware of how much this person shouldn't have a gun helped him get the gun.

But wait... it gets better.

State police had received a “clear and present danger report” on Crimo after the September incident, but because at the time he did not have a pending application or an active permit, known as a FOID card, the agency ruled there was no action it could take. When reviewing Crimo’s application less than six months later, state police officials once again decided there was nothing they could do — this time, the agency said, because Crimo had a sponsor.

Gun culture in this country has gotten so out of hand, the system knew he was a problem, but it felt it couldn't do anything about it.

The gun culture failed, the system failed, the father failed, the killer... well he accomplished what he sought to do.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is an interesting look at it, and potentially a small part of the solution as the police officers on site were inhibited from better judgment due to adrenaline and the officers were NOT in control of their actions. The officers put themselves in ridiculous prone positions relative to suspect in Akron. At least some of the officers had absolutely no cover... for absolutely no tactical gain whatsoever. They could have hung around their cars and waited. Instead, adrenaline is getting the better of their minds. They put themselves at needless levels of serious risk to themselves, and with their entire body being exposed to bullets, will over-react in self-defense to just about any motion the suspect can make.

1) You keep saying this--but you still haven't given any means to arrest or pursue while maintaining cover.

2) Cars aren't cover, anyway. Most parts of a car a bullet will go right through. Engine blocks are partial cover for one person.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Shooting at officers who are trained and prepared to shoot back (for the reason of wanting to escape) is different from shooting at unsuspecting civilians watching a parade. He may have been an idiot for cutting ass from and (allegedly) shooting at the police as well as suspicious (IMO) for wearing a ski mask, but he didn't have a confirmed body count warranting the shoot that MF 60 times response. American Police = try to kill us or make us think you're trying to kill us and we may not be taking you in alive. Kill a bunch of civilians? Meh.

I'm not advocating for police to commit a crime (get your minds out of the gutter). What I'm trying to put on display here is they seem to care more about self-preservation than serving and protecting. Kna mean? When has the police made a mistake or gone overboard resulting in the death of an individual suspected of committing a mass shooting*? You'd think emotions would be boiling over with the thought of their loved ones (other officers at least) being a random victim & justified fear for their lives being that they are dealing with someone suspected of shooting people indiscriminately. I haven't heard of an unarmed mass shooter getting shot 60ish times or anything remotely close because they moved a certain way that made all responding officers just go blast happy.

*I know the definition of mass shooting is based solely on numbers but in this question, I'm talking about suspects deliberately trying to kill as many innocent people as possible.

You seem to not understand what's going on at all.

Police don't shoot someone because of what they have done in the past. Police shoot someone because of what they are doing right now.

The fact that they think the guy they are arresting is a mass shooter is irrelevant. The ski mask guy did shoot at the cops--when it looked like he was trying to do so again they shot him.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Something is going on in the white community that is breading mass shooters yo. Yall dominate that. Wassup?

Mass shooters are disproportionately non-white.

I do agree the conservatives are breeding mass shooters, though--the same forces that elected His Flatulence cause hate in general. Combine hate with being suicidal and sometimes they lash out against those they perceive as the cause of their problems.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Anyhow, there are plenty of numbers available. but here's one as close to what I'm talking about as I can get.

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories

Persons who committed public mass shootings in the U.S. over the last half century were commonly troubled by personal trauma before their shooting incidents, nearly always in a state of crisis at the time, and, in most cases, engaged in leaking their plans before opening fire. Most were insiders...

nij.ojp.gov

Of the 172 individuals who engaged in public mass shootings covered in the database, 97.7% were male. Ages ranged from 11 to 70, with a mean age of 34.1. Those shooting were 52.3% White, 20.9% Black, 8.1% Latino, 6.4% Asian, 4.2% Middle Eastern, and 1.8% Native American.

Most individuals who perpetrated mass shootings had a prior criminal record (64.5%) and a history of violence (62.8%), including domestic violence (27.9%). And 28.5% had a military background. Most died on the scene of the public mass shooting, with 38.4% dying by their own hand and 20.3% killed by law enforcement officers.

[note 1] The Congressional Research Service has defined a public mass shooting as a “a multiple homicide incident in which four or more victims are murdered with firearms”, not including the shooter(s), “within one event, and [where] at least some of the murders occurred in a public location or locations in close geographical proximity (e.g., a workplace, school, restaurant, or other public settings), and the murders are not attributable to any other underlying criminal activity or commonplace circumstance (armed robbery, criminal competition, insurance fraud, argument, or romantic triangle).”

Even without "selection bias" white people top the list. I'd like to give women the honorable mention of miraculously not making the list btw. But let's proceed to talk about how there are more white people living in America than Black, Latino, Asian, Middle Eastern & Native Americans as if that somehow makes the problem go away.

Foot, meet bullet.

Mass shootings: 52.3% white.
America: 61.6% white. (Which is an undercount as your data goes back many years and America has been growing less white.)

Whites are underrepresented.

 

[laughing dog]

Something is going on in the white community that is breading mass shooters yo. Yall dominate that. Wassup?

Mass shooters are disproportionately non-white.

it depends on the definition one uses. The smaller the minimum number of victims, the smaller the proportion of white shooters.