A debate for mass shootings

[Matt_Crimson]

So there seems to be a big argument that always comes up whenever something like a mass shooting occurs here in the US. The argument usually pops up whenever the media isn't immediately calling the perpetrator(s) a terrorist when it's someone who isn't middle eastern. Do you consider the Las Vegas shooter a terrorist or not? What about other mass killings here in the US that haven't labeled the assailant(s) as terrorists? What is it that we are really trying to say when we label some people terrorists and others as just "deranged" and "mentally ill"? Do you find it meaningful to label any mass killing event as terrorism?

[Benton]

SO far, no, he isn’t a terrorist.

Terrorist have a gain, either monetary, political, spiritual, etc. so far, he’s a mass murderer. But there’s no ideology, no gain from the fear.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Was it specifically for political or religious reasons? If no, then it's not terrorism.
From what I have heard, this guy just decided one day he wanted to kill folks and started planning it. That's not terrorism, just a psychopath.

If he went into a mosque and then screamed "This is for 8lb, 6oz Baby Jesus!", then it's terrorism.
If he went to a baseball practice full of senators of the opposite political party he believes in and started shooting them all, then it's terrorism.

If you start just calling every crime terrorism, it loses all meaning. Just like the term "hero" lost all meaning after it's overuse post-9/11 instead becoming to mean anyone who does a good thing, and "racist" is bordering on losing it's meaning after the 2016 election becoming to mean anyone who doesn't agree with a liberal, and "traitor" is bordering on losing it's meaning after the 2016 election becoming to mean anyone who doesn't agree with a conservative. Just because more than one person got attacked, still doesn't make it terrorism. For instance, I don't consider the Dallas shooter a terrorist. Just a murderous racist. I also don't consider Dylan Roof to be a terrorist. Also just a murderous racist.

Overuse of a word to expand to more people than it was intended to makes that word really not mean anything anymore.

[*michaelsean*]

I'm going with not a terrorist. It way work in the same way as terror in that people stop attending functions like this, but terrorism stems from the intention of the person committing the act. so for example, the guy that attacked people with a machete at Ohio State could very well be a terrorist although nobody was killed.

[Bengalzona]

Heck, I'm having trouble convincing some people that what he did was evil. This is primarily because they are convinced that the concept of evil is an antiquated superstition and that there is a scientific reason for what he did.

Sane people sometimes do evil and cruel acts to other humans. That is known as human history.

As far as terrorism, until it is shown that his intent was to cause panic rather than just murder as many people as he could, I'll stick with not terrorism.

[Johnny Cupcakes]

May not be terrorism in the traditional sense, but no question about it, events like this create terror within people, and have the same effect as the terrorism that you're all referring to.

I have heard several people state that they avoid large events now, and have been avoiding them for a while. When average, every day citizens are afraid to do what they once would have done, and live in fear of a boogeyman who wants to end their life for one insane reason or another, I consider that terrorism.

[Au165]

(10-04-2017, 11:57 AM)Johnny Cupcakes Wrote: I have heard several people state that they avoid large events now, and have been avoiding them for a while.  When average, every day citizens are afraid to do what they once would have done, and live in fear of a boogeyman who wants to end their life for one insane reason or another, I consider that terrorism.

So is a serial rapist a terrorist because they keep people from walking in a local park at night? Crime, and especially repetitive crime, cause people to change their habits. If someone breaks in down the street from you, you are probably going to start locking your doors. Terrorism requires a reason, something ideologically driving it, otherwise you could literally call everything terrorism and if everything is terrorism then nothing technically is terrorism.

[GMDino]

(10-04-2017, 12:10 PM)Au165 Wrote: So is a serial rapist a terrorist because they keep people from walking in a local park at night? Crime, and especially repetitive crime, cause people to change their habits. If someone breaks in down the street from you, you are probably going to start locking your doors. Terrorism requires a reason, something ideologically driving it, otherwise you could literally call everything terrorism and if everything is terrorism then nothing technically is terrorism.

I think, to me, that is why motivation is the key.

If someone attacks a church or a political building it seems (in most cases) the motivation is because they oppose the people in those buildings.  Same with a gay night club.  Those are specific events though.

In Vegas?  We don't know why all of a sudden this guy went off.  

Does it it create "terror"?  Yes.  Is it an act of terrorism?  I'm assuming not because he didn't attack a group of christians/muslims/gays/republicans he just attacked a group.

Ted Bundy created a terror for young women...but his goal was not to do that.  It was to rape and kill women.  He didn't want them afraid...he wanted them to be easily captured.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

Terrorist is a word that is rapidly losing all meaning,again thanks to insane overuse and a desire to label opponents with a loaded word. It has joined racist, white supremacist and Nazi. As Benton correctly pointed out terrorism is violence or the threat of violence in the furtherance of a cause. Thus, everyone labeling the shooter as a terrorist is deliberately misusing the term. Anyone labeling the NRA a terrorist organization is deliberately misusing the term. We are rapidly approaching the point where, for many people, words only mean what they want them to mean.

[BengalHawk62]

I don't know why......but this Vegas shooting reminds me of another story before the media got a hold of these stories and spread them like wildfire......the KillDozer story. A man named Marvin Heemeyer was an owner operator of a welding, muffler shop in Granby Co.  He got into a dispute with city council over zoning ordinances of his shop, etc.  Basically the city was trying to shut down his shop, going even so far as to fine him for junk cars, etc, so they could rezone his shop area so a large concrete plant could come in.  Anyways, what he decided to do was build a super bull dozer. He welded make shift armor plating onto this bulldozer and welded himself inside of it.  Then he went on a slow rampage across town thru City Hall, a hardware store, a library.  Just destroying buildings and roads etc. The police couldn't stop him, only until the radiator went out in the dozer and he fell into a small basement of the hardware store is when he was stopped.  Its an interesting read if you ever get around to it.  Heemeyer was noted for saying, "Sometimes reasonable men must do unreasonable things."[/url]
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marvin_Heemeyer







Anyways, I just think these particular events have some similarities to them.  But instead of destroying building, this Paddock guy destroyed lives. Is Heemeyer a terrorist?






Maybe, maybe not, I might be high right now. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

There is only one law that would conceivably prevent further mass shootings, complete outlawing firearms and confiscating all that are currently in private hands.  Anything else is a pointless, feel good, appear to be doing something, gesture.  The level of planning this guy exhibited is insane, there is not a single law that would have stopped him; he had knowledge, money, time and enough intelligence to put this together.  Those things combined, or honestly any two, will trump any law you care to write. 

[JustWinBaby]

(10-04-2017, 03:45 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: There is only one law that would conceivably prevent further mass shootings, complete outlawing firearms and confiscating all that are currently in private hands. 

Guns would flow into the US as easily as illegal drugs do now.  I would say these guys might pop on your radar a little easier because you can monitor some of those illegal channels....but Fast N' Furious.

[GMDino]

This popped up in my FB memories from two years ago.  Sadly I don't remember which mass shooting that was right now.

Quote:After the latest mass killing I have seen some very interesting takes on line:


1) Guns don't kill people...people kill people!

Then why do we need guns?

2) Only a good person with a gun can stop a bad person with a gun.

He went down in a "suicide by cop" hail of bullets. Cops are good guys...but I don't think that's what you meant. I can't remember one mass shooting where the shooter was taken out by someone at the scene with a gun.

3) This is because God is no longer...something. 

If God will not stop a shooting in a church He will not interfere anywhere. This didn't happen because children aren't forced to pray every morning to one god. And if it did it wouldn't explain why there are shootings in movie theaters, hospitals, public, etc...that God allows too. Just stop.

Even if you believe 100% with your heart that somehow God would step in and stop all this if put the ten commandments on every street corner you have to understand that WE DO THIS TO OURSELVES. This is HUMAN behavior.

When someone kills in the name of their god we say they are not following that religion correctly...or they are following the WRONG religion. When someone kills someone because of the god the victim believes in we jump up to defend whatever god we believe in.

We have created a culture of hatred. One where *I* am right...*YOU* are wrong and there is no need to discuss anything in between. We have a culture where having "more" is more important that just having enough. Greed is killing us from the inside out. Greed and hate and envy and whatever vice you want to list.

And God is not going to suddenly jump in. Not because we are too far gone, but because we do it to ourselves.

So if it makes you feel better to buy another gun, or to pray, or to complain that is the rights fault or the lefts fault just remember that its OUR fault...we are too damn sure that "we" are right and we don't want to face the cold hard choices it would take to change a damn thing.

[JustWinBaby]

(10-04-2017, 12:16 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:  We are rapidly approaching the point where, for many people, words only mean what they want them to mean.

Well, that's basically the state of politics today....the use of grandiose hyperbole to convey faux passion in order to mask a lack of good ideas.

[GMDino]

(10-04-2017, 04:34 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Well, that's basically the state of politics today....the use of grandiose hyperbole to convey faux passion in order to mask a lack of good ideas.

Does this include the people who call themselves nazis? 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2017, 04:37 PM)GMDino Wrote: Does this include the people who call themselves nazis? 

This inane question, smugly asked, doesn't really deserve a detailed response.  By definition, no.

Please stop peddling your BS and stick to baiting Lucie, he's the target on your level.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(10-04-2017, 04:29 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: Guns would flow into the US as easily as illegal drugs do now.  I would say these guys might pop on your radar a little easier because you can monitor some of those illegal channels....but Fast N' Furious.

To be sure, my statement suggested an outcome beyond the realm of possibility.  As you say, even if possible illegal guns would be available the hour after all the previously legal ones were snapped up.

(10-04-2017, 04:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: This popped up in my FB memories from two years ago.  Sadly I don't remember which mass shooting that was right now.

A lot of smugness and zero answers.  In other words, business as usual.

[GMDino]

(10-04-2017, 04:39 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: This inane question, smugly asked, doesn't really deserve a detailed response.  By definition, no.

Please stop peddling your BS and stick to baiting Lucie, he's the target on your level.

(10-04-2017, 04:41 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: To be sure, my statement suggested an outcome beyond the realm of possibility.  As you say, even if possible illegal guns would be available the hour after all the previously legal ones were snapped up.



A lot of smugness and zero answers.  In other words, business as usual.

No gif?

[*michaelsean*]

(10-04-2017, 04:30 PM)GMDino Wrote: This popped up in my FB memories from two years ago.  Sadly I don't remember which mass shooting that was right now.

Quote:Only a good person with a gun can stop a bad person with a gun.

Quote:He went down in a "suicide by cop" hail of bullets. Cops are good guys...but I don't think that's what you meant. I can't remember one mass shooting where the shooter was taken out by someone at the scene with a gun.

I don't see the qualifier of mass shooting in the original statement.  I do recall, and I will try to find it, a person starting to shoot up a mall and when someone with a gun arrived, the shooter killed himself.  I believe the Las Vegas shooter killed himself when the police (good guys with guns) showed up.  In fact, every time someone with a gun shows up, the shooting stops.

[GMDino]

(10-04-2017, 04:51 PM)michaelsean Wrote: I don't see the qualifier of mass shooting in the original statement.  I do recall, and I will try to find it, a person starting to shoot up a mall and when someone with a gun arrived, the shooter killed himself.  I believe the Las Vegas shooter killed himself when the police (good guys with guns) showed up.  In fact, every time someone with a gun shows up, the shooting stops.

Yeah, I know of a few now.  The one in the mall is the first one you mentioned.

I still think the good guy with a gun stopping a shooting is a lot more rare than the bad guy with a gun going on a shooting spree until the cops show up or they kill themselves.