• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Today's Mass Shooting

Status
Not open for further replies.
Any word/theories/insane crackpot ramblings about the choice of target? Not to too fine a point of it but this wasn't a target of opportunity, it's something he staked out and traveled a long distance to attack.

ETA: And we just had another mass shooting at a church in California, zero details at this moment.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Any word/theories/insane crackpot ramblings about the choice of target? Not to too fine a point of it but this wasn't a target of opportunity, it's something he staked out and traveled a long distance to attack.
Click to expand...

As counterintuitive as it sounds, it may have actually been a matter of convenience. The shooter lived in an essentially lily-white small town in upstate New York. In order to have the chance to kill a large number of specifically black people in one shooting, he had no choice but to travel to an urban center.

The alleged manifesto supports this; in it, he doesn't mention the grocery store in particular but says he is going to Buffalo because that's where there are large numbers of blacks.
 
That actually makes sense now that you say it. I guess my Southeastern mindset couldn't get into a place of having to travel a distance to find a cluster of black people to victimize (there's a sentence I sure hope gets taken out of context)
 
sir drinks-a-lot said:
an even worse thing about that statement than being very, deeply, stupid and comprehensively dishonest is the fact that it's completely imaginary. I just hate it when I imagine someone saying something so comprehensively dishonest!
Click to expand...

No, it isn't imaginary. That's exactly what people are arguing when they dismiss things like police brutality because 'Chicago shootings!' or complain that we are wrong to give so much attention and condemnation to these terrorist attacks than to violence from street crime, or that they don't have to deal with terrorist white ethnostate ideology becoming mainstream conservative thinking in the US until black and brown people in aggregate meet some vague arbitrary standard of 'taking personal responsibility'.

This doesn't cease to be the case just because the people making those arguments don't have the intellectual integrity or ability, or just courage, to acknowledge that is what their argument means. 'That's a straw man!' Nope, that's calling out the game. They need to stand by their arguments and the logical necessary components of them, even if those components make them look villainous.

They don't get to stab my kidney and avoid arrest because they keep saying they were honestly trying to help. You can't argue that you want to withhold formula from babies in holding centers and pretend you're not alright with starving those babies. You can't avoid dealing with racism by whataboutisms with street crime and pretend you're not arguing racism isn't a true problem just by saying you're not.

It's pretty wild that only one of those is made up (so far).

Speaking of imaginary annoying stuff, the worst of all the posters that claim this wasn't racially motivated. I imagine they start their imaginary posting soon, at which point I'll send them to Joe Morgue and smartcooky. Should be an interesting, although completely imaginary, conversation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but be real, because you'll say nothing about it if they did. Your boy Bogative hasn't acknowledge that yet as far as I can tell (genuine apologies and surprise if he has). You and he have tried very hard to find ways to instead blame people actually trying to deal with what to do with your political movement becoming so supportive of this racist conspiracy theory. Maybe if you conservatives started caring, that would change.

But you all hate 'liberals' enough to overcome the incentives to do a damn thing about that.

EDIT: Opps! Look at that! A State Senator for the GOP (literally representative of them) has done that thing you said would be imaginary! What a shock.
 
Last edited:
JoeMorgue said:
Well someone has to tell the racist trolls what the official story is.
Click to expand...

“nteresting timing in how this seems to happen every single election season, during midterm elections like clockwork when Democrats are in power.”
Click to expand...




Interesting how the Las Vagas shootings took place in October 2017 while the Repugnicans were in power!

Interesting how the Parkland School shootings took place in February 2018, in the year of the 2018 midterms... while the Repugnicans were in power!

Interesting how the Tree of Life synagogue shooting took place in October 2018, in the year of the 2018 midterms... while the Repugnicans were in power!

Interesting how the Poway Synagogue shooting took place in May 2019, while the Repugnicans were in power!

Interesting how the Virginia Beach shooting took place in May 2019, while the Repugnicans were in power!

Interesting how the El Paso Walmart shooting took place in August 2019, while the Repugnicans were in power!

And I can find just as many when the Democrats were in power..

The truth is, there is no connection between mass shootings, when elections are and who is in power at the time.

The truth is, there are so goddamned many of these mass shooting that its impossible to determine any correlation.

The truth is, they will get more numerous and a lot worse so long as America continues to bury its collective head in the sand as regards the ease with which any nutter can legally get their hands on a gun.
 
Last edited:
Thermal said:
The little bitch shooter is only 18 years old, and with a history of making terrorist death threats. Not even old enough to buy a beer, but was able to waltz into a shop and pick up a weapon like that with less fuss than buying a used car. Even legal requirements like the NY Safe compliance didn't slow him down from modifying the mag back to high capacity. Christ Almighty.
Click to expand...

That's (in part) because the modification to bring it back into compliance with SAFE was a pitiful half-assed one. Basically he just needed a set of screw drivers and a vise to undo it. He didn't have to have smithing skills or equipment.

He fired fifty times to kill ten people. That's, well, that police level bad marksmanship. He would not have been able to kill that many if he didn't have the higher cap swapable mags. That's the thing about guns like this. A smart, determined, lucky, skilled, or clever sack of pus can kill a lot of people a lot of ways even without a firearm. These guns let moronic, lazy, unlucky, bumbling, dullards kill a lot of people reliably and quickly. Such people should not have access to them. If that means that almost no one should have access to them, well, that wasn't were I started last decade but it's becoming something even I could get behind at this point.
 
tyr_13 said:
That's (in part) because the modification to bring it back into compliance with SAFE was a pitiful half-assed one. Basically he just needed a set of screw drivers and a vise to undo it. He didn't have to have smithing skills or equipment.

He fired fifty times to kill ten people. That's, well, that police level bad marksmanship. He would not have been able to kill that many if he didn't have the higher cap swapable mags. That's the thing about guns like this. A smart, determined, lucky, skilled, or clever sack of pus can kill a lot of people a lot of ways even without a firearm. These guns let moronic, lazy, unlucky, bumbling, dullards kill a lot of people reliably and quickly. Such people should not have access to them. If that means that almost no one should have access to them, well, that wasn't were I started last decade but it's becoming something even I could get behind at this point.
Click to expand...

The problem is the genie won't get back in the bottle. An outright ban will not, and can not happen.
I have no idea what the solution is, but I'd like to see people licensed to carry guns, insured, and all fire arms registered.
 
This happened only a couple of days ago, and when I read it I wondered "What could possibly go wrong!". Yes, I get it that this is in California and the murders were in New York, but it seriously boggles my mind that free and easy access to semi-automatic weapons is such a cherished idea in the US.

A federal appeals court in California has ruled that the state's ban on the sale of semiautomatic firearms to Americans under 21 is unconstitutional.

In a 2-1 vote, the judges' panel said the law was an "an almost total ban on semiautomatic" rifles for youths.
The law came in response to failures from Congress to pass gun control.

It took effect in 2019, raising the minimum requirement for rifle and shotgun sales from 18 years to 21. The court ruling brings the minimum age back to 18. The minimum legal age in California for tobacco, alcohol or cannabis sales is 21.
Click to expand...

Link
 
Question: Did California try to limit sale of CENTER FIRE semiautomatic weapons, or did they include rimfires? Big goddamn difference.

Believe I'll try to find the actual language.

ETA: Yes, the judgers knocked down a ban on center fire semiauto rifles to 18teenies. Jesus Hopgod Christ. How do these creeps get onto any bench but a park bench?
 
Last edited:
Shalamar said:
The problem is the genie won't get back in the bottle. An outright ban will not, and can not happen.
I have no idea what the solution is, but I'd like to see people licensed to carry guns, insured, and all fire arms registered.
Click to expand...

Agreed. IMHO it's model which could work quite well. And would help with 'young kid gets gun and goes on spree'. Wouldn't solve all problem, but could be a start. And something which allows law abiding citizen to keep his guns.
Sure, there is long repeated mantra registration before confiscation .. and it actually did happen in some countries. It also didn't happen in others.
2nd amendment for sure is obsolete .. I consider my self (non American) quite a gun nut .. but US gun nuts defending it are quite funny.
 
Dr.Sid said:
Agreed. IMHO it's model which could work quite well. And would help with 'young kid gets gun and goes on spree'. Wouldn't solve all problem, but could be a start. And something which allows law abiding citizen to keep his guns.
Sure, there is long repeated mantra registration before confiscation .. and it actually did happen in some countries. It also didn't happen in others.
2nd amendment for sure is obsolete .. I consider my self (non American) quite a gun nut .. but US gun nuts defending it are quite funny.
Click to expand...

Of course it is obsolete....it is far too restrictive
 
It seems the US is stuck in a feedback loop. More gun crime, must get more guns. Which leads to more gun crime, then more guns.....

Even if 10 or 20 of these mass shootings occurred every day, the hysterical reaction would be to get more guns, and so on and on and on, with nothing but a bigger heap of bodies for an outcome.

And I'll add to the observation that in Buffalo our "good guy with a gun" only became a victim himself. Putting the lie to that old, ******** trope. At least while the crazies can obtain assault weapons and body armor.

I really wonder just what it would require for America to come to its senses. Sandy Hook sure didn't move the nation. Not even Vegas, with over 50 killed and some 500 injured (if my memory is reliable). Slaughter and maiming--by just one man--on the scale of a company level military operation on Guadalcanal, for Christ's sake!

Would a quad .50 mounted on a Humvee roaring through Manhattan, moving down a couple thousand do it? Nah. The good old chestnut about mental health would be trotted out. Of course.

To be sure, mental health is at issue. On a national scale.
 
Shalamar said:
The problem is the genie won't get back in the bottle. An outright ban will not, and can not happen.
I have no idea what the solution is, but I'd like to see people licensed to carry guns, insured, and all fire arms registered.
Click to expand...

Correct, although not the point I was making. I mean that even as a lawful gun owner and nerd I'd still go for it even if it wouldn't be nearly as effective as other country's heavy restrictions for many reasons.

I really should start that thread about the factors that determine the effectiveness of a prohibition, be it alcohol, firearms, pot, nuclear weapons, or abortion. One of the major ones in my view, in fact usually the major one, is buy-in from the population. The less of it there is, the less effective the prohibition will be.

There are many aspects of the NY SAFE Act that I find maladaptive. Silly even. The restrictions on muzzle devices. The restriction on having a thumb behind the grip. These just don't meaningfully effect the murder or mass shooting terrorism use of firearms, and are often only extremely marginal over large numbers in military situations. That said, if I have to accept the stupid parts to get the background checks and capacity limits, fine. I'd rather have graduated licenses and storage restrictions (letting the most regulated users have their fully automatic drum mag at the range fun even), but at this point I'm willing to compromise a lot more than I thought I ever would.

Of course I'm also doing something else with firearms I never thought I would; configuring one for mutual defense use. If these Proud Boys/III%/mainstream GOP terrorists get more bold, well, I'm too queer friendly and an 'n-word lover' who's outspoken about it. They aren't shy about threatening people like me either.
 
Last edited:
portlandatheist said:
https://www.mediaite.com/politics/a...oter-was-a-fed-in-deranged-conspiracy-theory/
Arizona State Senator Wendy Rogers (GQP) goes full truther on the shooting. These ******** love to pour salt on open wounds.
Click to expand...

I suppose she'll have to explain herself. Based on her quote, I'm not sure the article you cited reaches the correct conclusion about what she meant.


For those not wanting to click the link, Rogers said, "Fed boy summer has begun", and the article said that implied she thought the gunman was a federal agent of some sort. My first thought on reading the quote was that she meant the area would soon be crawling with feds.


It's still nuts, but it's a different kind of nuts.
 
It's interesting to me that the Buffalo shooter waited until he was 18. After all, illegality of firearms, we are told, makes no difference in the ability to obtain or transport them. He could have done this last year, couldn't he?
 
Just another Saturday and Sunday in the USA. Like the NBL and NFL, it's now a regular event in everyone's lives. So regular that most of the "games" are not even mentioned in the news. Only when there is a "big score" does it rate a mention. And even then, Tucker Carlson et al will insist it was some other team, beating some non-existent opponent, resulting in some other score.
 
tyr_13 said:
Yeah, but be real, because you'll say nothing about it if they did. Your boy Bogative hasn't acknowledge that yet as far as I can tell (genuine apologies and surprise if he has). You and he have tried very hard to find ways to instead blame people actually trying to deal with what to do with your political movement becoming so supportive of this racist conspiracy theory.
Click to expand...

Why would I deny this shooting being racially motivated? From all that I have read the shooter said it was himself. There's nothing to deny about his motivation. If it is your belief that I have denied racially motivated shootings in the past as being racially motivated, please present your evidence because I believe your claim to be completely imaginary.

There have been 201 mass shootings so far this year, the left widely ignored 200 of them and finally found one to be outraged about.

The Biden regime has been warning us about RMVE-white supremacists committing a mass shooting for close to 1 1/2 years. After nearly 800 mass shootings, they finally got their man. I know why I'm supposed to be more concerned about this than the others, but I'll take a hard pass.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom