12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

[EverCurious]

I'm sure my husband would join in that watering, but what about me. Problem with CW 2.0 is the government is lost so it's a moot point :/

Yeah. I talk a lot of shit about fighting back against they tyrants just on principle alone, but you're right, we're too far gone. Our government has been lost for a long time. We're 22 trillion in debt, our dollar is worth 4 cents, the market is gonna collapse by default any year now, and given the dependence on the massive welfare state we run, when the government runs out of money to steal and when they've totally devalued the dollar to the point that they cant print any more, when the people have nothing else to lose, they'll lose it in the streets. Notwithstanding the fact that we've drifted into a true police state. I wanna be as far away from that as possible. Personally, I plan on being out of the country before they finally tank it. I'm prepared to make the move, and I will. Though, I was hoping they'd get their wall up sooner to keep the zombies and the jackboots contained.

There's too many other nice countries in the world to want to hang around this powder keg. And it's all manufactured from the top down. The more I think on it, the more I believe they want to use the media to create unrest and to go after the guns because they know they can't keep patching that bubble. It's literally the biggest bubbe in the history if mankind. There will be civil unrrest, the likes this country has never known.

I plan to be on the outside and watching the smoke rise from afar. Maybe sipping on those blue fruity things with the little pink umbrellas in em.

I partially agree, but I think you are being naive.

When the US goes, the rest of the world is going with it.

See my post above son. You're right, the world it going with the US, but we will make it through, after the left and the idiots turn on each other and kill each other for not agreeing 100%... We will survive, they will not.

There is no, "us and them," we are one.

We are all one human family, together we stand, or we fall.

Yeah, no sorry. I'm done with the bullshit game sorry. I refuse to be lumped in with these violent abusive fucks who think that we shouldn't have free speech, a means to defend ourselves (2nd), and fucking due process, who think that my fucking pocket book is theirs to raid, who think that my entire family deserves to die simply for having American ideals about real liberty.

I am /not/ one with them and if that means we fall, then by fuck all we're falling because I will /not/ put my life in the hands of a violent fascist mob, period. I am a free American woman and I will never be under the thumb of vile people. I will die first. My husband will have my full fucking support to take out as many as possible if/when they come for us - presuming we don't get the fuck out of this failed state before then.

 

[Natural Citizen]

OL is doing pretty good by herself, tho, she's hanging in there by herself, agree or disagree with her position. Good battles, OL. The glory isn't really in the victory or the defeat. It's in the charge. Know what I mean?

 

[depotoo]

Do remember Obama’s doj changed the definition of a mass shooting, also.

Three things will happen.

1) We will find out everyone in this person's life knew he was crazy.
2) We will find he was able to amass a lot of firepower with little or no trouble.
3) 2AGuy and other NRA shills will be on here spamming the thread with their gun "Facts" that are anything but.

We won't find out that Big Pharma and his doctor filled him with synthetic drugs that likely are the cause. As is the case with most mass shooters.

Great point there!

How many of these nutters are on medication that has alter their perception in life and if the person stop taking them they go full nutter?

What should be looked at is the pill pushing industry and their peddlers!

I notice that too.

Like clock work, the corporate media ALWAYS harps on the guns, but because of HIPAA laws, no one ever questions what mood altering drugs these killers are on.


Ever since the passage of the ACA, these shootings have sky rocketed by poor, uneducated, mentally unstable desperate folks, but the corporate press hasn't been telling the brain dead public anything about that.

. . . and I suspect it has to do with the drugs that the community mental health providers are putting them on.

And BIG PHARMA wants the profits and wants THAT kept quiet.

I mean, I know correlation is not causation, but wow, take a look at this;

The ACA passes in 2010.

All of a sudden, we have this spike in mass shootings?

We have always had guns, what we haven't always had is mass availability of psychotropic drugs to just any poor person that used to go out and get a bottle of booze when they felt pissy or blue;

 

[MisterBeale]

A person that can defend themselves is the greatest threat to tyranny.

Old Lady made the damn mistake claiming she can defeat tyranny with education and her intellect but when I pointed out Trotsky stupidity by thinking he was smarter than Stalin, well noticed she went silent quickly.

Also notice when it is pointed out the guy disobeyed the laws the progressive left want us to be silent and not discuss the possible failures because if any failure then it ruins their argument that more laws will help.

As I pointed out the progressive left want to do away with our rights from owning firearms to what we say and in this thread there are great examples!

I went silent yesterday because as usual you are spouting your right wing bullshit tapes instead of listening to what I said. I don't expect anyone to agree, but if you want to talk, at least address what I said. I told you why the second amendment is a useless and counterproductive measure.

I also tried to suggest other options for getting our violence problem under control, but you have been conveniently dismissing all that because the NRA has apparently not given you sound bytes for those.

You just go on calling me stupid in as many ways as you can and then you start pulling in Stalin and Trotsky? WTF? C'mon Bruce. Put your feet on the ground and focus if you want to have a discussion.

I addressed your false perception about the uselessness of the 2nd Amendment.

Perhaps you need to revisit it? It was by the authority on world history, by that guy, Carroll Quigley, that is telling you the truth behind the corporate media conditioning you to the reason why you really want to get rid of it?

Did you watch that video? Breaking News - 12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

Minute 8:00, remember? You never addressed it. Why not? That is the authority on world history, he told us, remember, crucial to a nation's liberty?

Who are you to dispute that? Some professor at Harvard now?

I tried watching it, Mr. Beale, but I listened to quite a bit of it and did not see that it was addressing the second amendment. I don't agree with how you view the world's affairs. Sorry.

I cannot compensate for your lack of attention span, it is not slick corporate media, dumbed down to the lowest common denominator. It is intellectual reasoning. If you think this is bad, try reading some of the stuff our founders wrote!

The first part of the video establishes the History and Credentials of Georgetown Professor Carroll Quigley's book, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, how it came to be, Gatto's research into the issue, and why folks know so little. Towards the end of the video, we get the statement about the right to bear arms and it's significance vis-a-vie liberty and a free people.

I appreciate your admission that this content is beyond your ability to grasp, and how it conflicts with the dominant paradigm you have been immersed in your whole life. The very first part of the video actually addresses that. It should concern you. The dominant paradigm is paid for by commercial advertisers because it was bought up by the oligarchs. That is how the very beginning of the video starts out, with the minutes being read into the congressional record by Congressmen Calloway, of the media being bought up by the Rockefellers. Our media is no different today. It is all owned by 6 giant entities.

This is pretty much why the controllers of society, (the folks that run DARPA) have given us things like twitter and FB, they count on folks having shortened attention spans and limited critical reasoning. (text messaging, 140 character count, etc.)

Limit the exchange of ideas, limit freedom.

it conflicts with the dominant paradigm you have been immersed in your whole life.
Yes. I don't have enough background in his belief system to make heads nor tails of it. I don't think it is because I grew up with text messaging and twitter. I'm a little older than that.
Not understanding your deeply conspiratorial theories is not really a failing on my part, Mr. Beale. Calling me a deficient thinker isn't going to interest me in a lot of additional exchange about it either.

Again, you did not watch the entire video. You clearly got bored and did not follow it.

Gatto told you that Quigley's book confirmed that many of the round table groups were actively conspiring against the democratic norms of society. This isn't conjecture, it is a fact. It isn't my, "deeply conspiratorial theories," these are now, out in the open, little known facts, and the reason the corporate press, in conjunction with the ruling elites, are trying to get you to lobby for stripping you of your own natural right to self-defense.

You already admitted it is a failing on your part. What are we arguing about? You already stated that you could not follow it? That's my explanation why you can't. If it isn't because electronic media has shortened your tolerance for consumption of information, what is yours?

Would you like to post a link that shows why Quigley is a fraud? I even posted a link showing that is was the mentor of Bill Clinton, what else do you need?

 

[Skull Pilot]

There was a time I lioved with in walking distance of this bar. I do not remember any bar being in that plaza when I lived there. while I do not have the names of the victomes I likely knew some. There is no way to end killings in total. This will never happen. I personally would rather be able to shoot back in this situation. I would like to quit naming the perp after word. Killing the right to bear arms will not stop this. I do not have solutions currently but I am thinking about it.

I'm sorry, evenflow.

I don't think we will ever end all killings, either, but we can end mass shootings, at least make them "rare" again--once a decade instead of once a week. I agree with you about notoriety for the shooter, but you had to want to know who it was and why, didn't you? Now that we know, sink him into infamy.

1% of all murders occur in mass shootings

1%

if anything else caused 1% of something anyone with a brain would say it's pretty rare and wouldn't obsess about it

MSM told her guns are bad, so she refuses to look at the actual stats about mass shootings.

She refuses to take into account America population size and that we are Fifty States and some States population are larger than most countries in the World.

She believe that making more laws will finally convince criminals that breaking them will stop killings.

What she has yet to learn is Cain and Able story tell me at least humans never learn and their lust for blood and death can never be taught out of them...

No, it's not that.

She thinks none of that is really the issue, she doesn't see the need for the 2nd Amendment. We are not having a conversation. She is comparing our nation with other nation's that don't have a 2nd Amendment. She wants our right to bear arms gone, that is what the media is telling folks, that we don't need it.

All I want her to address is these two videos, as the world authority on history has written, an armed people is a free people;

Breaking News - 12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

. .. . and there is no denying, America has more free speech, and more liberty than any other nation.

and there is no denying, America has more free speech, and more liberty than any other nation.
Something has gone wrong. Is it perhaps that we have let those two things take precedence over responsibility for a safe and sane society?

No we ignore the real murder problem in this country because people like you want to concentrate on 1% of all murders

 

[OldLady]

I went silent yesterday because as usual you are spouting your right wing bullshit tapes instead of listening to what I said. I don't expect anyone to agree, but if you want to talk, at least address what I said. I told you why the second amendment is a useless and counterproductive measure.

I also tried to suggest other options for getting our violence problem under control, but you have been conveniently dismissing all that because the NRA has apparently not given you sound bytes for those.

You just go on calling me stupid in as many ways as you can and then you start pulling in Stalin and Trotsky? WTF? C'mon Bruce. Put your feet on the ground and focus if you want to have a discussion.

I addressed your false perception about the uselessness of the 2nd Amendment.

Perhaps you need to revisit it? It was by the authority on world history, by that guy, Carroll Quigley, that is telling you the truth behind the corporate media conditioning you to the reason why you really want to get rid of it?

Did you watch that video? Breaking News - 12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

Minute 8:00, remember? You never addressed it. Why not? That is the authority on world history, he told us, remember, crucial to a nation's liberty?

Who are you to dispute that? Some professor at Harvard now?

I tried watching it, Mr. Beale, but I listened to quite a bit of it and did not see that it was addressing the second amendment. I don't agree with how you view the world's affairs. Sorry.

Why do you want to give up your right to self defense? Have you bothered to study the history of this issue? If you had, you would know what a terrible idea this is.

Well, I appreciate your approach, gipper. I made the choice early in my life not to protect myself with a firearm and I have never changed my mind. I was not aware that a lot of other countries had ever had an automatic right to own guns emblazoned in their Constitution. In retrospect, I think THAT may be been a terrible idea. Certainly, the resistance to restricting ownership to responsible and stable people has been a terrible idea and if people don't start compromising on this, I think the threat of the 2nd going away is going to become more real.
My position on guns has always been radical and I have no hope whatsoever of ever seeing my country agree with me.

Well if history can be used as our guide, I too would expect the 2A to disappear. After all, the ruling class demands it and they usually get what they want. The consequences of this, again if history is our guide, will be rather harmful to the American people. Once criminals and the government (one and the same) are the only one's armed, well we know what happens....if history is our guide.

What happens? Switzerland?

 

[MisterBeale]

Do remember Obama’s doj changed the definition of a mass shooting, also.

Three things will happen.

1) We will find out everyone in this person's life knew he was crazy.
2) We will find he was able to amass a lot of firepower with little or no trouble.
3) 2AGuy and other NRA shills will be on here spamming the thread with their gun "Facts" that are anything but.

We won't find out that Big Pharma and his doctor filled him with synthetic drugs that likely are the cause. As is the case with most mass shooters.

Great point there!

How many of these nutters are on medication that has alter their perception in life and if the person stop taking them they go full nutter?

What should be looked at is the pill pushing industry and their peddlers!

I notice that too.

Like clock work, the corporate media ALWAYS harps on the guns, but because of HIPAA laws, no one ever questions what mood altering drugs these killers are on.


Ever since the passage of the ACA, these shootings have sky rocketed by poor, uneducated, mentally unstable desperate folks, but the corporate press hasn't been telling the brain dead public anything about that.

. . . and I suspect it has to do with the drugs that the community mental health providers are putting them on.

And BIG PHARMA wants the profits and wants THAT kept quiet.

I mean, I know correlation is not causation, but wow, take a look at this;

The ACA passes in 2010.

All of a sudden, we have this spike in mass shootings?

We have always had guns, what we haven't always had is mass availability of psychotropic drugs to just any poor person that used to go out and get a bottle of booze when they felt pissy or blue;

No, I don't.

I remember a media outlet doing that.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yes if no one was free we'd all be safe

And if everyone is free, no one will be safe.

so down with freedom

guaranteed safety for everyone

Maybe you should run for office on that platform

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

 

[OldLady]

I went silent yesterday because as usual you are spouting your right wing bullshit tapes instead of listening to what I said. I don't expect anyone to agree, but if you want to talk, at least address what I said. I told you why the second amendment is a useless and counterproductive measure.

I also tried to suggest other options for getting our violence problem under control, but you have been conveniently dismissing all that because the NRA has apparently not given you sound bytes for those.

You just go on calling me stupid in as many ways as you can and then you start pulling in Stalin and Trotsky? WTF? C'mon Bruce. Put your feet on the ground and focus if you want to have a discussion.

I addressed your false perception about the uselessness of the 2nd Amendment.

Perhaps you need to revisit it? It was by the authority on world history, by that guy, Carroll Quigley, that is telling you the truth behind the corporate media conditioning you to the reason why you really want to get rid of it?

Did you watch that video? Breaking News - 12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

Minute 8:00, remember? You never addressed it. Why not? That is the authority on world history, he told us, remember, crucial to a nation's liberty?

Who are you to dispute that? Some professor at Harvard now?

I tried watching it, Mr. Beale, but I listened to quite a bit of it and did not see that it was addressing the second amendment. I don't agree with how you view the world's affairs. Sorry.

I cannot compensate for your lack of attention span, it is not slick corporate media, dumbed down to the lowest common denominator. It is intellectual reasoning. If you think this is bad, try reading some of the stuff our founders wrote!

The first part of the video establishes the History and Credentials of Georgetown Professor Carroll Quigley's book, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, how it came to be, Gatto's research into the issue, and why folks know so little. Towards the end of the video, we get the statement about the right to bear arms and it's significance vis-a-vie liberty and a free people.

I appreciate your admission that this content is beyond your ability to grasp, and how it conflicts with the dominant paradigm you have been immersed in your whole life. The very first part of the video actually addresses that. It should concern you. The dominant paradigm is paid for by commercial advertisers because it was bought up by the oligarchs. That is how the very beginning of the video starts out, with the minutes being read into the congressional record by Congressmen Calloway, of the media being bought up by the Rockefellers. Our media is no different today. It is all owned by 6 giant entities.

This is pretty much why the controllers of society, (the folks that run DARPA) have given us things like twitter and FB, they count on folks having shortened attention spans and limited critical reasoning. (text messaging, 140 character count, etc.)

Limit the exchange of ideas, limit freedom.

it conflicts with the dominant paradigm you have been immersed in your whole life.
Yes. I don't have enough background in his belief system to make heads nor tails of it. I don't think it is because I grew up with text messaging and twitter. I'm a little older than that.
Not understanding your deeply conspiratorial theories is not really a failing on my part, Mr. Beale. Calling me a deficient thinker isn't going to interest me in a lot of additional exchange about it either.

Again, you did not watch the entire video. You clearly got bored and did not follow it.

Gatto told you that Quigley's book confirmed that many of the round table groups were actively conspiring against the democratic norms of society. This isn't conjecture, it is a fact. It isn't my, "deeply conspiratorial theories," these are now, out in the open, little known facts, and the reason the corporate press, in conjunction with the ruling elites, are trying to get you to lobby for stripping you of your own natural right to self-defense.

You already admitted it is a failing on your part. What are we arguing about? You already stated that you could not follow it? That's my explanation why you can't. If it isn't because electronic media has shortened your tolerance for consumption of information, what is yours?

Would you like to post a link that shows why Quigley is a fraud? I even posted a link showing that is was the mentor of Bill Clinton, what else do you need?

Mr. Beale, having no preexisting scaffold of ideas on which to pin his discussion, I find it difficult to follow him. As I said before. So leave your discussion to people who understand what you are talking about, and leave me out of it. Please.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I went silent yesterday because as usual you are spouting your right wing bullshit tapes instead of listening to what I said. I don't expect anyone to agree, but if you want to talk, at least address what I said. I told you why the second amendment is a useless and counterproductive measure.

I also tried to suggest other options for getting our violence problem under control, but you have been conveniently dismissing all that because the NRA has apparently not given you sound bytes for those.

You just go on calling me stupid in as many ways as you can and then you start pulling in Stalin and Trotsky? WTF? C'mon Bruce. Put your feet on the ground and focus if you want to have a discussion.

I addressed your false perception about the uselessness of the 2nd Amendment.

Perhaps you need to revisit it? It was by the authority on world history, by that guy, Carroll Quigley, that is telling you the truth behind the corporate media conditioning you to the reason why you really want to get rid of it?

Did you watch that video? Breaking News - 12 Dead in Mass Shooting at So.Cal Bar

Minute 8:00, remember? You never addressed it. Why not? That is the authority on world history, he told us, remember, crucial to a nation's liberty?

Who are you to dispute that? Some professor at Harvard now?

I tried watching it, Mr. Beale, but I listened to quite a bit of it and did not see that it was addressing the second amendment. I don't agree with how you view the world's affairs. Sorry.

Why do you want to give up your right to self defense? Have you bothered to study the history of this issue? If you had, you would know what a terrible idea this is.

Well, I appreciate your approach, gipper. I made the choice early in my life not to protect myself with a firearm and I have never changed my mind. I was not aware that a lot of other countries had ever had an automatic right to own guns emblazoned in their Constitution. In retrospect, I think THAT may be been a terrible idea. Certainly, the resistance to restricting ownership to responsible and stable people has been a terrible idea and if people don't start compromising on this, I think the threat of the 2nd going away is going to become more real.
My position on guns has always been radical and I have no hope whatsoever of ever seeing my country agree with me.

Again, you just stated your position is radical, so no one will ever convince you how wrong you are!

Maybe if you stop your hate speech on all sides, giving people pills for everything, and enforce the laws you have, well just maybe shit will change, but of course you will just want gun owners to give in when the majority of us did nothing wrong!

THE BIG LIE: "of course you will just want gun owners to give in when the majority of us did nothing wrong!"

 

[Wry Catcher]

And if everyone is free, no one will be safe.

so down with freedom

guaranteed safety for everyone

Maybe you should run for office on that platform

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I too read the book, and watched the movie too. Your comment is stupid, unless you think (lol) that I needed to post the entire book. IF you read the book, you might understand why I referenced it.

 

[OldLady]

And if everyone is free, no one will be safe.

so down with freedom

guaranteed safety for everyone

Maybe you should run for office on that platform

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I took my son to see it when he was a young teenager, thinking he would be really troubled by our instinctive yuckiness toward each other. He empathized with Jack and the big'uns until almost the end. I did worry about him at that age.

 

[Skull Pilot]

so down with freedom

guaranteed safety for everyone

Maybe you should run for office on that platform

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I too read the book, and watched the movie too. Your comment is stupid, unless you think (lol) that I needed to post the entire book. IF you read the book, you might understand why I referenced it.

All you had to do was reference it

no link to someone else's interpretation was necessary

 

[Skull Pilot]

so down with freedom

guaranteed safety for everyone

Maybe you should run for office on that platform

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I took my son to see it when he was a young teenager, thinking he would be really troubled by our instinctive yuckiness toward each other. He empathized with Jack and the big'uns until almost the end. I did worry about him at that age.

You should have made him read the book

 

[depotoo]

Actually, it was a Dem led Congress that did in 2012.
Obama’s inconsistent claim on the ‘frequency’ of mass shootings in the U.S. compared to other countries - The Washington Post
The FBI does not officially define “mass shooting” and does not use the term in Uniform Crime Report records. In the 1980s, the FBI established a definition for “mass murder” as “four or more victims slain, in one event, in one location,” and the offender is not included in the victim count if the shooter committed suicide or was killed in a justifiable homicide, according to a Congressional Research Service report detailing the definitions.

After the 2012 shootings in Newtown, Conn., Congress defined “mass killings” to mean “three or more killings in a single incident.”
(Which includes the shooter)

Do remember Obama’s doj changed the definition of a mass shooting, also.

We won't find out that Big Pharma and his doctor filled him with synthetic drugs that likely are the cause. As is the case with most mass shooters.

Great point there!

How many of these nutters are on medication that has alter their perception in life and if the person stop taking them they go full nutter?

What should be looked at is the pill pushing industry and their peddlers!

I notice that too.

Like clock work, the corporate media ALWAYS harps on the guns, but because of HIPAA laws, no one ever questions what mood altering drugs these killers are on.


Ever since the passage of the ACA, these shootings have sky rocketed by poor, uneducated, mentally unstable desperate folks, but the corporate press hasn't been telling the brain dead public anything about that.

. . . and I suspect it has to do with the drugs that the community mental health providers are putting them on.

And BIG PHARMA wants the profits and wants THAT kept quiet.

I mean, I know correlation is not causation, but wow, take a look at this;

The ACA passes in 2010.

All of a sudden, we have this spike in mass shootings?

We have always had guns, what we haven't always had is mass availability of psychotropic drugs to just any poor person that used to go out and get a bottle of booze when they felt pissy or blue;

No, I don't.

I remember a media outlet doing that.

 

[MisterBeale]

I'm sure my husband would join in that watering, but what about me. Problem with CW 2.0 is the government is lost so it's a moot point :/

Yeah. I talk a lot of shit about fighting back against they tyrants just on principle alone, but you're right, we're too far gone. Our government has been lost for a long time. We're 22 trillion in debt, our dollar is worth 4 cents, the market is gonna collapse by default any year now, and given the dependence on the massive welfare state we run, when the government runs out of money to steal and when they've totally devalued the dollar to the point that they cant print any more, when the people have nothing else to lose, they'll lose it in the streets. Notwithstanding the fact that we've drifted into a true police state. I wanna be as far away from that as possible. Personally, I plan on being out of the country before they finally tank it. I'm prepared to make the move, and I will. Though, I was hoping they'd get their wall up sooner to keep the zombies and the jackboots contained.

There's too many other nice countries in the world to want to hang around this powder keg. And it's all manufactured from the top down. The more I think on it, the more I believe they want to use the media to create unrest and to go after the guns because they know they can't keep patching that bubble. It's literally the biggest bubbe in the history if mankind. There will be civil unrrest, the likes this country has never known.

I plan to be on the outside and watching the smoke rise from afar. Maybe sipping on those blue fruity things with the little pink umbrellas in em.

I partially agree, but I think you are being naive.

When the US goes, the rest of the world is going with it.

See my post above son. You're right, the world it going with the US, but we will make it through, after the left and the idiots turn on each other and kill each other for not agreeing 100%... We will survive, they will not.

There is no, "us and them," we are one.

We are all one human family, together we stand, or we fall.

Yeah, no sorry. I'm done with the bullshit game sorry. I refuse to be lumped in with these violent abusive fucks who think that we shouldn't have free speech, a means to defend ourselves (2nd), and fucking due process, who think that my fucking pocket book is theirs to raid, who think that my entire family deserves to die simply for having American ideals about real liberty.

I am /not/ one with them and if that means we fall, then by fuck all we're falling because I will /not/ put my life in the hands of a violent fascist mob, period. I am a free American woman and I will never be under the thumb of vile people. I will die first. My husband will have my full fucking support to take out as many as possible if/when they come for us - presuming we don't get the fuck out of this failed state before then.

OldLady and people like her ARE NOT "violent fascist mob."

They are our fellow humans beings, our countrymen, and need protection too.

You read this, then tell me if they are the enemy, or victims.

Propaganda by Edward Bernays (1928)

And what do we do with victims, let them die, or save them?

 

[OldLady]

OL is doing pretty good by herself, tho, she's hanging in there by herself, agree or disagree with her position. Good battles, OL. The glory isn't really in the victory or the defeat. It's in the charge. Know what I mean?

 

[MisterBeale]

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I took my son to see it when he was a young teenager, thinking he would be really troubled by our instinctive yuckiness toward each other. He empathized with Jack and the big'uns until almost the end. I did worry about him at that age.

You should have made him read the book

Yup, made my son read it.

It was one of the first apocalyptic literature that he read.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I too read the book, and watched the movie too. Your comment is stupid, unless you think (lol) that I needed to post the entire book. IF you read the book, you might understand why I referenced it.

All you had to do was reference it

no link to someone else's interpretation was necessary

Obviously you believe my comment was only for you, it was not, it was posted since not everyone has read, or recalls the takeaway from the book.

 

[OldLady]

Freedom and security are not mutually exclusive.

If everyone is free no one will be safe

those are your words not mine.

Read through this link, then get back to me:

SparkNotes: Lord of the Flies

I read the actual book maybe you should too instead of having someone else read it for you and then tell you what it means

I took my son to see it when he was a young teenager, thinking he would be really troubled by our instinctive yuckiness toward each other. He empathized with Jack and the big'uns until almost the end. I did worry about him at that age.

You should have made him read the book

That would have involved bloodshed, Skull. I chose my battles.