0
airtwardo

Mass shooting @ Sikh temple near Milwaukee

Recommended Posts

>Starting a war is not the fault of the people

No, but killing a soldier who just happens to be in your sights is. A soldier who kills a dozen enemies is not just justified, he's a hero to his countrymen. Even a rebel who kills a dozen government troops. We build statues of such people.

>A woman killing an abuser might be justified by self defense.
>A man who kills his wife simply because she's a nag is insane.

See what you did there? You decided that two people who did exactly the same thing had different justifications - one valid, one invalid - even though the cases, as stated, are close to identical. And you've decided that since YOU agree or disagree with their justifications, one is insane and one is not.

Which is one problem with your unjustified=insane argument. You can't just decide that anyone whose actions you disagree with is insane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>A woman killing an abuser might be justified by self defense.
>A man who kills his wife simply because she's a nag is insane.

See what you did there? You decided that two people who did exactly the same thing had different justifications - one valid, one invalid - even though the cases, as stated, are close to identical.



The two are nowhere near identical!

Yes, I decided the two have different justifications. I was curious what Kelp's if he thought the mass murder's was justifiable or not.

Wtf?
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>The two are nowhere near identical!

Explain please.



Do you literally believe a person can be nagged to death?

Yes, yes, verbal abuse is still abuse, but you used the word "nag."
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


So what would you propose to keep guns from the hands of madmen while allowing sane law abiding gun owners to exercise their rights? Or do you consider a few mass shootings like Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Milwaukee to be of little consequence?



when did the Milwaukee shooter get classified as a madman?



It actually took you additional time to snip the question to which I responded, which was "Are Americans stupid enough to use the actions of a few madmen as justification for taking away the constitutional right of everyone else who exercises that right responsibly?"

Pretty poor debate technique, kelp, in addition to being misleading AND lame.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Do you literally believe a person can be nagged to death?
No more so than they can be verbally abused to death.



Bill, the angle of your arguments have gotten a little over 90° lately.

But, you know, you're probably right, I'm sure it will turn out this guy was a perfectly sane individual who decided to pick up a gun and kill people in a church. I'm sure there's a logical explaination for his actions.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/06/us/wisconsin-shooting-suspect/index.html

Or not. Hmmm, Come to think of it, probably not.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

So what would you propose to keep guns from the hands of madmen while allowing sane law abiding gun owners to exercise their rights? Or do you consider a few mass shootings like Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Milwaukee to be of little consequence?



What would you propose to stop the highway carnage of 36,000 dead every year in auto accidents, while still allowing safe drivers on the road? Or do you consider 36,000 dead to be of little consequence? Is that acceptable losses so that you can enjoy the freedom of driving a car? Is it selfish of you to want your car while 36,000 people die every year?

Apparently the answer for just about everyone is "yes". We love our cars, and live with the consequences of that. Freedoms have a price. Just like the right to own guns.

But we can reduce this highway carnage by instituting a nationwide 20 mph speed limit, that would eliminate nearly all of those traffic fatalities, without infringing upon everyone's freedom to own cars and drive. Would you be in favor of that? Sure, it's gonna take you longer to get to work and back home, but wouldn't saving 36,000 lives be worth it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


So what would you propose to keep guns from the hands of madmen while allowing sane law abiding gun owners to exercise their rights? Or do you consider a few mass shootings like Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Milwaukee to be of little consequence?



when did the Milwaukee shooter get classified as a madman?



It actually took you additional time to snip the question to which I responded, which was "Are Americans stupid enough to use the actions of a few madmen as justification for taking away the constitutional right of everyone else who exercises that right responsibly?"

Pretty poor debate technique, kelp, in addition to being misleading AND lame.



No, poor technique, not to mention annoying as fuck to the rest of us, is when you and rush or you and [a couple other characters] do a two step of one liners to each other without culling anything off the top.

I asked a simple question - is there any evidence, other than Quade's medically inaccurate belief that all killers are insane, that this shooter was mentally deficient, rather than a 40 yo loser who blames minorities for his failure in life?

We haven't even established yet that Aurora is a case of a mental patient that somehow should have been identified in advance. But in this case, you got even less. I know why you want to group him with the shooters in Virginia and Tucson, but it's clear you're inserting your own beliefs into the data to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

>A woman killing an abuser might be justified by self defense.
>A man who kills his wife simply because she's a nag is insane.

See what you did there? You decided that two people who did exactly the same thing had different justifications - one valid, one invalid - even though the cases, as stated, are close to identical.



The two are nowhere near identical!

Yes, I decided the two have different justifications. I was curious what Kelp's if he thought the mass murder's was justifiable or not.

Wtf?



No, you said, not asked..."So, you think he was justified in his actions?" Which is a classic loaded question..."So, Kelp, you see a justification for a man to walk into a church and shoot up the parishioners....please entertain us with the explanation."

My answer is summed up best with the one finger salute.

The hilarious bit is that if anyone else bought this steamer, no one could ever get convicted for murder. They would all be mentally incapable of answering for their crimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Really, I mean you should go back to your Texas desert and think about it again (especially about the "few"...).

Skydivers have to prove their skills permanently - at least, here in Germany with a minimum jump number per year to keep licence valid.

What are you gun kissing folks doing to prove your shooting skills? I mean, except bringing your little kids to the shooting range to make you feel proud if that 5 y/o is killing a coke can :S

Your "right to exercise ..." is killing more and more people in your country. Do you think, that was your *founding fathers'* intention?

:|



Dallas isn't desert. Everything else you said about guns is wrong too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

The hilarious bit is that if anyone else bought this steamer, no one could ever get convicted for murder. They would all be mentally incapable of answering for their crimes.



I don't think you know what you're talking about when it comes to the legal standard for a "not guilty by reason of insanity" defense.

You might want to look into it. In particular the changes that took place after the Reagan assassination attempt by Hinkley.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote


So what would you propose to keep guns from the hands of madmen while allowing sane law abiding gun owners to exercise their rights? Or do you consider a few mass shootings like Virginia Tech, Tucson, Aurora and Milwaukee to be of little consequence?



when did the Milwaukee shooter get classified as a madman?



It actually took you additional time to snip the question to which I responded, which was "Are Americans stupid enough to use the actions of a few madmen as justification for taking away the constitutional right of everyone else who exercises that right responsibly?"

Pretty poor debate technique, kelp, in addition to being misleading AND lame.



No, poor technique, not to mention annoying as fuck to the rest of us, is when you and rush or you and [a couple other characters] do a two step of one liners to each other without culling anything off the top.

I asked a simple question - is there any evidence, other than Quade's medically inaccurate belief that all killers are insane, that this shooter was mentally deficient, rather than a 40 yo loser who blames minorities for his failure in life?

We haven't even established yet that Aurora is a case of a mental patient that somehow should have been identified in advance. But in this case, you got even less. I know why you want to group him with the shooters in Virginia and Tucson, but it's clear you're inserting your own beliefs into the data to do so.



Feeble response.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

The first retaliation for 9/11 was a white guy who shot a Sikh outside his gas station a few days after 9/11, assuming he was a Muslim.

If Americans are really this stupid, is there justification for allowing them to have guns? I mean really?



Are Americans stupid enough to use the actions of a few madmen as justification for taking away the constitutional right of everyone else who exercises that right responsibly?

If skydivers are really stupid enough to fly themselves into the ground at high speed and kill themselves under perfectly functioning canopies, is there justification for allowing them to have parachutes? I mean really?


Really, I mean you should go back to your Texas desert and think about it again (especially about the "few"...).

Skydivers have to prove their skills permanently - at least, here in Germany with a minimum jump number per year to keep licence valid.

What are you gun kissing folks doing to prove your shooting skills? I mean, except bringing your little kids to the shooting range to make you feel proud if that 5 y/o is killing a coke can :S

Your "right to exercise ..." is killing more and more people in your country. Do you think, that was your *founding fathers'* intention?

:|


Our founding fathers intended us not to become a Germany

So far it is working
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


It seems it is one of the most peaceful religions there is..... ever



Interesting to hear how different cultures are perceived in different places, even at the simplest and maybe stereotyped level.

Here in Canada I thought the perception of Sikhs might be more towards seeing them as having a culture that harbors some fanatical, violent, religious extremists.

Although there have been a few attacks within their community over politics (e.g., a Sikh newspaper editor being killed in western Canada by other Sikhs), the main issue in Canada giving the religion a bad image comes from the 1985 Air India bombing. The 747 took off from Canada and its bombing killed 280 Canadians among the 329 aboard. The investigation never was very conclusive when it came to successful prosecutions, and it dragged on over something like 20 years. So for 20 years Canadians heard about Sikhs killing hundreds of Canadians -- even if it was all the same incident. Killers named Singh, heard over and over.

I can't say for sure what others think, but I believe the religion can be seen here in Canada as bringing unwanted tension and extremism "from the old country", even if Sikhs in general will be regarded no differently than any other cultural community.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had



I had to laugh at your last statement. If you posed that question in a closed AA meeting, meaning regular members, you would probably get several detailed explanations of that thought process.

Maybe it was as simple as a method for a government sponsored retirement plan. You know food, shelter, clothing and medical care for life since he lost his ARMY retirement.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had



I had to laugh at your last statement. If you posed that question in a closed AA meeting, meaning regular members, you would probably get several detailed explanations of that thought process.

Maybe it was as simple as a method for a government sponsored retirement plan. You know food, shelter, clothing and medical care for life since he lost his ARMY retirement.



I am not sure what you mean

But let me explain a bit further

When my boys were young, and a story of a mother killing her baby, or a dad hurting a child or some other story, (such as the mass killings) they would ask me, dad, how could anybody do that?

I would tell them I do not know. I can not understand just as you can not understand. But know, that not understanding the actions these people took is a good thing

Because, if you can not understand it, the chances of you ever doing something similar is almost nil.
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had



I had to laugh at your last statement. If you posed that question in a closed AA meeting, meaning regular members, you would probably get several detailed explanations of that thought process.

Maybe it was as simple as a method for a government sponsored retirement plan. You know food, shelter, clothing and medical care for life since he lost his ARMY retirement.



I am not sure what you mean

But let me explain a bit further

When my boys were young, and a story of a mother killing her baby, or a dad hurting a child or some other story, (such as the mass killings) they would ask me, dad, how could anybody do that?

I would tell them I do not know. I can not understand just as you can not understand. But know, that not understanding the actions these people took is a good thing

Because, if you can not understand it, the chances of you ever doing something similar is almost nil.



I apologize. You are making a serious comment and I am just being a smart ass.

Recovering alcoholics frequently share in meetings, at least the ones I have attended, that they would like to kill someone who has pissed them off. It is called venting.

The latter part is my cynical nature. The various departments of corrections are closed societies where all of your needs are met by taxpayers.
Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote


So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had



I had to laugh at your last statement. If you posed that question in a closed AA meeting, meaning regular members, you would probably get several detailed explanations of that thought process.

Maybe it was as simple as a method for a government sponsored retirement plan. You know food, shelter, clothing and medical care for life since he lost his ARMY retirement.



I am not sure what you mean

But let me explain a bit further

When my boys were young, and a story of a mother killing her baby, or a dad hurting a child or some other story, (such as the mass killings) they would ask me, dad, how could anybody do that?

I would tell them I do not know. I can not understand just as you can not understand. But know, that not understanding the actions these people took is a good thing

Because, if you can not understand it, the chances of you ever doing something similar is almost nil.



I apologize. You are making a serious comment and I am just being a smart ass.

Recovering alcoholics frequently share in meetings, at least the ones I have attended, that they would like to kill someone who has pissed them off. It is called venting.

The latter part is my cynical nature. The various departments of corrections are closed societies where all of your needs are met by taxpayers.



Ok, got it

Now I see your point

Thanks
"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote


So, you think he was justified in his actions?



To himself?

Most likely

Just because there is no way for many of us to understand what would drive someone to do this (which is a good thing) does not make him crazy

Evil would be a better term IMO

In either case, all we can do is guess and hope we never do understand the thought process he had



I had to laugh at your last statement. If you posed that question in a closed AA meeting, meaning regular members, you would probably get several detailed explanations of that thought process.

Maybe it was as simple as a method for a government sponsored retirement plan. You know food, shelter, clothing and medical care for life since he lost his ARMY retirement.



I am not sure what you mean

But let me explain a bit further

When my boys were young, and a story of a mother killing her baby, or a dad hurting a child or some other story, (such as the mass killings) they would ask me, dad, how could anybody do that?

I would tell them I do not know. I can not understand just as you can not understand. But know, that not understanding the actions these people took is a good thing

Because, if you can not understand it, the chances of you ever doing something similar is almost nil.



When I was in NI I remember a English colleague saying to a catholic college from Belfast that he wanted to understand the 'Troubles'. The Belfast man said 'its not possible to understand because its hatred, to understand there needs to be some thought process involved, its hatred plain and simple.'

I think that applies to this murderer also, if you don't hate asians and others who are not white then its not possible to understand, its hatred plain and simple.
When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites