BREAKING NEWS--CA--Another Mass Shooting

[Katzndogz]

How do we get them treatment?

We need more government funding.

How is that going to happen? Have you seen the fight regarding obamacare? The right will never agree to help people with mental illness.

What do you want public benefits for millionaires?

 

[Katzndogz]

The disease is the entitlement culture. We had less crime when everyone was openly armed.

 

[Theowl32]

Aaaannnd liberals use a tragedy again as another poignant opportunity to push their political agenda by using various irrelevant fallacies.

Proving once again their comical logic as they gather on their bandwagon of pure bullshit.

They have no ability to think for themselves and every day they prove it.

 

[westwall]

A small price to pay for a right to bear arms

Just ignore it, there will be another one in a week or two

Asshole was driving a BMW. How many could he kill just by driving into a bunch of them at high speed? Shit, had he done that down Del Playa on a party night he would have killed dozens.

True - he "could have" done any number of things that he didn't. Since we don't live in a drive-cars-into-people culture, that didn't occur to him.

Now if we had regular instances of cars driven into people and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every movie and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every TV cop show and drive-cars-into-people video games and a romanticized history of pioneers who drove cars into Indians and a powerful lobbying group protecting the Constitutional rights of people to drive on the sidewalk coming up with rationalizations of the practice every time a sidewalk driver was irresponsible enough to actually hurt somebody, well you might have an actual concern here.

You mean like this asshole?

Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder


Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder - CNN.com

 

[Pogo]

How do we get them treatment?

Like way too many others Rocko wants to run around putting fingers in the dyke, treating a million symptoms while ignoring a single disease.

Mentally ill people weren't just invented; they've always been with us. And still will be tomorrow, from directions we can't anticipate. But regardless how stable or unstable somebody is, without a culture that's continuously yammering on and on about the idolatry of Almighty Gun, it wouldn't be what they use as a way out.

But yeah, good luck with that game of whack-a-mole...

Post #47 ... http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...s-ca-another-mass-shooting-2.html#post9149693

Rocko is correct Pogo...there is NO shortage of field expedient weaponry available to this kind of mentally ill individual.

Homemade bombs, homemade chloramine gas, homemade napalm and thermite.

Head-on collision with a bus.

Simple gasoline.

Treating the mentally ill is the only solution.

uh... what? Who said there was a shortage of weaponry?

We really don't have much of a bomb culture, certainly not a chloramine gas culture or napalm, thermite or head-on collision culture. That's why we don't see mass chloramine gas attacks, napalm attacks, thermite attacks or people intentionally driving into things.

Your premise seems to be a commonly fallacious one: that such a shooter is out for destruction or murder (or both) as a goal in itself. I don't believe that's their goal at all. I think that premise is completely unfounded.

Their goal I believe is carnage, real blood spurting visual carnage, the same thing the cultural images from a thousand cop shows and movies and westerns and video games depict. Their goal is to stand in one spot and force people to run for their lives and spew blood and guts, visually. You don't get that with napalm or thermite or head-on collisions. You DO get it with a firearm.

The feedback to this twisted mind is the suffering going on in real time in front of their eyes. You just don't get that kind of sensory feedback with bombs or gases or collisions. This is ultimately an act of power. Forcing people to shriek and run for their lives is the ultimate visual power. THAT I believe is what they're going for in these acts, and THAT is why their weapon of choice is the firearm.

 

[Warrior102]

So, what we have here is a spoiled rotten rich little liberal faggot who cant get a piece of Foxnewslike hottie ass, so he jerks off, hops in his Beamer and kills people in a no-gun zone/no gun state.
Your plan isnt working too well Libturds

 

[Pogo]

Asshole was driving a BMW. How many could he kill just by driving into a bunch of them at high speed? Shit, had he done that down Del Playa on a party night he would have killed dozens.

True - he "could have" done any number of things that he didn't. Since we don't live in a drive-cars-into-people culture, that didn't occur to him.

Now if we had regular instances of cars driven into people and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every movie and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every TV cop show and drive-cars-into-people video games and a romanticized history of pioneers who drove cars into Indians and a powerful lobbying group protecting the Constitutional rights of people to drive on the sidewalk coming up with rationalizations of the practice every time a sidewalk driver was irresponsible enough to actually hurt somebody, well you might have an actual concern here.

You mean like this asshole?

Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder


Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder - CNN.com

No, I mean like a pattern.

You go find me evidence that that's an epidemic rather than some cherrypick that proves nothing and we'll talk turkey. I'm sure we could go find a case where somebody jacked himself off to death but it doesn't make a point here.

 

[Pogo]

The disease is gun culture, if it really needs to be spelled out.

McVeigh didn't need one, nor did Tsarnaev.

Their goals were different, weren't they.

 

[Pogo]

It's highly restricted in Belgium and yet this happened today.

'Anti-Semitic' shooting at Jewish Museum in Brussels leaves 4 dead | Mail Online

And -- how often does that happen in Belgium then?

Nordine Amrani: Inside the home of crazed Liege killer who launched Belgium grenade attack | Mail Online

You just linked back to the same case. You're saying this is the only time?

 

[Rocko]

That's the story so far, I'm sure. I'll be interested to see if it turns out that he was taking prescription drugs. It seems like these shooters are always taking something that was prescribed to them to "level them out."

Do you even understand antipsychotic medication prevents stuff like this from happening?? The reason why shooters like this are always taking medication is they're sick people. Many of the ones that do have episodes of violence are on the wrong medication or aren't taking the proper dosage, but that doesn't mean the medicine is making them kill. Remember we're not dealing with a perfect science yet, but there are people out there that are getting better with the help of doctors.

Some people get better, and some people get worse. There is, however, a correlation between crazy acts of violence like this and the use of psychotropic drugs, and it is further interesting to note that these shooting sprees have become more common in the age where these drugs have also become more common.

As explained the reason for that correlation is the people doing these things are mentally ill. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics are all drugs that have benefited society greatly. Unfortunately the science of psychiatry isn't as perfect as we'd like it to be, but these doctors aren't subscribing medication that will make people want to kill. People don't kill because of medication, unless there's an evil conspiracy out there, which there isn't.

 

[Yurt]

True - he "could have" done any number of things that he didn't. Since we don't live in a drive-cars-into-people culture, that didn't occur to him.

Now if we had regular instances of cars driven into people and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every movie and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every TV cop show and drive-cars-into-people video games and a romanticized history of pioneers who drove cars into Indians and a powerful lobbying group protecting the Constitutional rights of people to drive on the sidewalk coming up with rationalizations of the practice every time a sidewalk driver was irresponsible enough to actually hurt somebody, well you might have an actual concern here.

You mean like this asshole?

Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder


Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder - CNN.com

No, I mean like a pattern.

You go find me evidence that that's an epidemic rather than some cherrypick that proves nothing and we'll talk turkey. I'm sure we could go find a case where somebody jacked himself off to death but it doesn't make a point here.

DUI deaths....

but you ignore those deaths because no gun was involved. you disgust me.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Do you even understand antipsychotic medication prevents stuff like this from happening?? The reason why shooters like this are always taking medication is they're sick people. Many of the ones that do have episodes of violence are on the wrong medication or aren't taking the proper dosage, but that doesn't mean the medicine is making them kill. Remember we're not dealing with a perfect science yet, but there are people out there that are getting better with the help of doctors.

Some people get better, and some people get worse. There is, however, a correlation between crazy acts of violence like this and the use of psychotropic drugs, and it is further interesting to note that these shooting sprees have become more common in the age where these drugs have also become more common.

As explained the reason for that correlation is the people doing these things are mentally ill. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics are all drugs that have benefited society greatly. Unfortunately the science of psychiatry isn't as perfect as we'd like it to be, but these doctors aren't subscribing medication that will make people want to kill. People don't kill because of medication, unless there's an evil conspiracy out there, which there isn't.

What are your qualifications for making these statements as if they're established fact? Are you a doctor? A researcher? Have you read any research on the subject? Has there been any research on the subject?

As I said before, these drugs do help some people, but there's no way we can conclusively say that these drugs help everybody who uses them. In fact, I would suggest it's ridiculous on its face to say that of any drug. The over-prescription of psychotropic drugs is a real issue, and I would suggest that it's not unlikely that people who don't actually need these drugs might have adverse reactions to them if they do use them.

 

[Missourian]

Like way too many others Rocko wants to run around putting fingers in the dyke, treating a million symptoms while ignoring a single disease.

Mentally ill people weren't just invented; they've always been with us. And still will be tomorrow, from directions we can't anticipate. But regardless how stable or unstable somebody is, without a culture that's continuously yammering on and on about the idolatry of Almighty Gun, it wouldn't be what they use as a way out.

But yeah, good luck with that game of whack-a-mole...

Post #47 ... http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...s-ca-another-mass-shooting-2.html#post9149693

Rocko is correct Pogo...there is NO shortage of field expedient weaponry available to this kind of mentally ill individual.

Homemade bombs, homemade chloramine gas, homemade napalm and thermite.

Head-on collision with a bus.

Simple gasoline.

Treating the mentally ill is the only solution.

uh... what? Who said there was a shortage of weaponry?

We really don't have much of a bomb culture, certainly not a chloramine gas culture or napalm, thermite or head-on collision culture. That's why we don't see mass chloramine gas attacks, napalm attacks, thermite attacks or people intentionally driving into things.

Your premise seems to be a commonly fallacious one: that such a shooter is out for destruction or murder (or both) as a goal in itself. I don't believe that's their goal at all. I think that premise is completely unfounded.

Their goal I believe is carnage, real blood spurting visual carnage, the same thing the cultural images from a thousand cop shows and movies and westerns and video games depict. Their goal is to stand in one spot and force people to run for their lives and spew blood and guts, visually. You don't get that with napalm or thermite or head-on collisions. You DO get it with a firearm.

The feedback to this twisted mind is the suffering going on in real time in front of their eyes. You just don't get that kind of sensory feedback with bombs or gases or collisions. This is ultimately an act of power. Forcing people to shriek and run for their lives is the ultimate visual power. THAT I believe is what they're going for in these acts, and THAT is why their weapon of choice is the firearm.

That's an interesting hypothesis...but that's all it is, a hypothesis.

I have one also...they want people to pay...pay with their lives.

If they couldn't get guns, they'd find another way.

 

[Pogo]

Post #47 ... http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...s-ca-another-mass-shooting-2.html#post9149693

Rocko is correct Pogo...there is NO shortage of field expedient weaponry available to this kind of mentally ill individual.

Homemade bombs, homemade chloramine gas, homemade napalm and thermite.

Head-on collision with a bus.

Simple gasoline.

Treating the mentally ill is the only solution.

uh... what? Who said there was a shortage of weaponry?

We really don't have much of a bomb culture, certainly not a chloramine gas culture or napalm, thermite or head-on collision culture. That's why we don't see mass chloramine gas attacks, napalm attacks, thermite attacks or people intentionally driving into things.

Your premise seems to be a commonly fallacious one: that such a shooter is out for destruction or murder (or both) as a goal in itself. I don't believe that's their goal at all. I think that premise is completely unfounded.

Their goal I believe is carnage, real blood spurting visual carnage, the same thing the cultural images from a thousand cop shows and movies and westerns and video games depict. Their goal is to stand in one spot and force people to run for their lives and spew blood and guts, visually. You don't get that with napalm or thermite or head-on collisions. You DO get it with a firearm.

The feedback to this twisted mind is the suffering going on in real time in front of their eyes. You just don't get that kind of sensory feedback with bombs or gases or collisions. This is ultimately an act of power. Forcing people to shriek and run for their lives is the ultimate visual power. THAT I believe is what they're going for in these acts, and THAT is why their weapon of choice is the firearm.

That's an interesting hypothesis...but that's all it is, a hypothesis.

I have one also...they want people to pay...pay with their lives.

If they couldn't get guns, they'd find another way.

There's just no basis for that speculation. Look into what we can find about these bad actors and what was bugging them -- it's always a power thing. Harris and Klebold were shunned by their peers. Any number of disgruntled/fired workers. Racists. It's always an act of personal power. If you can find the school security video from Colombine, listen to how Harris and Klebold go whooping with a perversely delighted ecstatic rush every time they get a shot off. That's the feedback, happening in real time.

What you're building your premise on is that the goal is murder. Murder certainly exists, but it's targeted to a specific person for specific reasons. This is a whole different animal. This is carnage. And I think the first step to addressing such an epidemic is understanding the nature of what we're dealing with, rather than shrugging it off with facile theories.

Granted mine is another theory. But I say if you look at the cases it makes a lot more sense than simple random murder for no reason. Everything has a reason. And there's a reason the weapon of choice is almost always a firearm. If what you're after is murder, you're right, there's any number of ways. If what you're after is terror and carnage, there's one instrument tailor-made for the job and our culture makes sure we all know what it is: the firearm.

 

[dilloduck]

uh... what? Who said there was a shortage of weaponry?

We really don't have much of a bomb culture, certainly not a chloramine gas culture or napalm, thermite or head-on collision culture. That's why we don't see mass chloramine gas attacks, napalm attacks, thermite attacks or people intentionally driving into things.

Your premise seems to be a commonly fallacious one: that such a shooter is out for destruction or murder (or both) as a goal in itself. I don't believe that's their goal at all. I think that premise is completely unfounded.

Their goal I believe is carnage, real blood spurting visual carnage, the same thing the cultural images from a thousand cop shows and movies and westerns and video games depict. Their goal is to stand in one spot and force people to run for their lives and spew blood and guts, visually. You don't get that with napalm or thermite or head-on collisions. You DO get it with a firearm.

The feedback to this twisted mind is the suffering going on in real time in front of their eyes. You just don't get that kind of sensory feedback with bombs or gases or collisions. This is ultimately an act of power. Forcing people to shriek and run for their lives is the ultimate visual power. THAT I believe is what they're going for in these acts, and THAT is why their weapon of choice is the firearm.

That's an interesting hypothesis...but that's all it is, a hypothesis.

I have one also...they want people to pay...pay with their lives.

If they couldn't get guns, they'd find another way.

There's just no basis for that speculation. Look into what we can find about these bad actors and what was bugging them -- it's always a power thing. Harris and Klebold were shunned by their peers. Any number of disgruntled/fired workers. Racists. It's always an act of personal power. If you can find the school security video from Colombine, listen to how Harris and Klebold go whooping with a perversely delighted ecstatic rush every time they get a shot off. That's the feedback, happening in real time.

What you're building your premise on is that the goal is murder. Murder certainly exists, but it's targeted to a specific person for specific reasons. This is a whole different animal. This is carnage. And I think the first step to addressing such an epidemic is understanding the nature of what we're dealing with, rather than shrugging it off with facile theories.

Granted mine is another theory. But I say if you look at the cases it makes a lot more sense than simple random murder for no reason. Everything has a reason.

Your theory sucks--mass murderers don't sit and watch their victims bleed.

 

[Pogo]

That's an interesting hypothesis...but that's all it is, a hypothesis.

I have one also...they want people to pay...pay with their lives.

If they couldn't get guns, they'd find another way.

There's just no basis for that speculation. Look into what we can find about these bad actors and what was bugging them -- it's always a power thing. Harris and Klebold were shunned by their peers. Any number of disgruntled/fired workers. Racists. It's always an act of personal power. If you can find the school security video from Colombine, listen to how Harris and Klebold go whooping with a perversely delighted ecstatic rush every time they get a shot off. That's the feedback, happening in real time.

What you're building your premise on is that the goal is murder. Murder certainly exists, but it's targeted to a specific person for specific reasons. This is a whole different animal. This is carnage. And I think the first step to addressing such an epidemic is understanding the nature of what we're dealing with, rather than shrugging it off with facile theories.

Granted mine is another theory. But I say if you look at the cases it makes a lot more sense than simple random murder for no reason. Everything has a reason.

Your theory sucks--mass murderers don't sit and watch their victims bleed.

Link?

 

[Rocko]

Some people get better, and some people get worse. There is, however, a correlation between crazy acts of violence like this and the use of psychotropic drugs, and it is further interesting to note that these shooting sprees have become more common in the age where these drugs have also become more common.

As explained the reason for that correlation is the people doing these things are mentally ill. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics are all drugs that have benefited society greatly. Unfortunately the science of psychiatry isn't as perfect as we'd like it to be, but these doctors aren't subscribing medication that will make people want to kill. People don't kill because of medication, unless there's an evil conspiracy out there, which there isn't.

What are your qualifications for making these statements as if they're established fact? Are you a doctor? A researcher? Have you read any research on the subject? Has there been any research on the subject?

As I said before, these drugs do help some people, but there's no way we can conclusively say that these drugs help everybody who uses them. In fact, I would suggest it's ridiculous on its face to say that of any drug. The over-prescription of psychotropic drugs is a real issue, and I would suggest that it's not unlikely that people who don't actually need these drugs might have adverse reactions to them if they do use them.

I know two people who are close to me that suffer from mental illnesses, and they take medication. My sister is also a doctor and I've had numerous conversations with her on this subject. What, you think doctors prescribe medication that isn't researched?

Who said these drugs help everybody who uses them? The over prescription and under prescription of these drugs are certainly an issue. Nobody said it was a perfect science. Some of these drugs are know is cause suicide. That is something that has been proven, but there's no proof or prevailing medical theory that any of these prescription medicines cause people to be violent. All you and others like you have is an unfounded opinion. No proof. Just a theory not based on any fact.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

As explained the reason for that correlation is the people doing these things are mentally ill. Antidepressants, mood stabilizers, antipsychotics are all drugs that have benefited society greatly. Unfortunately the science of psychiatry isn't as perfect as we'd like it to be, but these doctors aren't subscribing medication that will make people want to kill. People don't kill because of medication, unless there's an evil conspiracy out there, which there isn't.

What are your qualifications for making these statements as if they're established fact? Are you a doctor? A researcher? Have you read any research on the subject? Has there been any research on the subject?

As I said before, these drugs do help some people, but there's no way we can conclusively say that these drugs help everybody who uses them. In fact, I would suggest it's ridiculous on its face to say that of any drug. The over-prescription of psychotropic drugs is a real issue, and I would suggest that it's not unlikely that people who don't actually need these drugs might have adverse reactions to them if they do use them.

I know two people who are close to me that suffer from mental illnesses, and they take medication. My sister is also a doctor and I've had numerous conversations with her on this subject. What, you think doctors prescribe medication that isn't researched?

Who said these drugs help everybody who uses them? The over prescription and under prescription of these drugs are certainly an issue. Nobody said it was a perfect science. Some of these drugs are know is cause suicide. That is something that has been proven, but there's no proof or prevailing medical theory that any of these prescription medicines cause people to be violent. All you and others like you have is an unfounded opinion. No proof. Just a theory not based on any fact.

Yes, what I'm saying is absolutely a theory. That's why I said "correlation," and why I never claimed that this was an absolute fact. You, however, are saying, as if it's a fact, that these medications aren't making people violent or delusional. You can't possibly know that. Yes, research is done on medications, and medications are approved even when they can cause terrible side effects, as you've already pointed out. I'm merely suggesting that there are probably going to be outliers that have strange results especially when so many people start taking these drugs.

As you keep repeating, it's not a perfect science, and we can't say for sure how every single person is going to respond to a drug. Given that these shooting sprees are more common at the same time more people are using these drugs, and that nearly every single perpetrator was on these drugs when they committed their crime, I'd say it's something clearly worth looking into rather than rejecting out of hand.

 

[westwall]

True - he "could have" done any number of things that he didn't. Since we don't live in a drive-cars-into-people culture, that didn't occur to him.

Now if we had regular instances of cars driven into people and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every movie and a drive-cars-into-people scene in every TV cop show and drive-cars-into-people video games and a romanticized history of pioneers who drove cars into Indians and a powerful lobbying group protecting the Constitutional rights of people to drive on the sidewalk coming up with rationalizations of the practice every time a sidewalk driver was irresponsible enough to actually hurt somebody, well you might have an actual concern here.

You mean like this asshole?

Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder


Man who plowed car into crowd at SXSW charged with capital murder - CNN.com

No, I mean like a pattern.

You go find me evidence that that's an epidemic rather than some cherrypick that proves nothing and we'll talk turkey. I'm sure we could go find a case where somebody jacked himself off to death but it doesn't make a point here.

The point I was making is absent a gun, he would have most likely done even more damage had he just driven his car into a crowd on Del Playa on a party night. Assholes like this can't be stopped, and the fact that he did use a gun, probably saved peoples lives.

This is what Del Playa looks like when there's a party on.... That's the intersection of Camino Pescadero and Del Playa..... An asshole like this, in that car could easily get up to 140 mph before hitting the crowd.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Here is another video from Elliot made 18 hrs ago. Listen to him.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4CressilIo]Elliot Rodger, Lonely Vlog, Life is so unfair - YouTube[/ame]