Liberal extremism isn't a new thing..

Between the rash of "flash parties" and teen suicides because of bullying, violent incidents among young people seem to be on the rise. I seriously have to blame the Internet, but I have no clue how to begin to resolve it. Teens today have way too much freedom.

Where are you getting that there's a rise in youth violence?

Huh? There are hundreds of articles and reports. Just a simple google of the subject will allow you to take your pick. This is one that addresses all the reasons.

Teen Violence,*School Shootings, Internet Addiction, Online Gaming Addiction, Bullying,*TV Violence, Internet Predators & Teen Suicide:*Facts, Ideas, And Actions, by Ofer Zur, PhD., offered by Zur Institute for Psychologists, MFTs, SWs, Counselors an

You seriously believe violent video games/violent TV are responsible for actual violence? Really?

Well you may have something, just look at how much the violent crime rates have risen what with all this violent games and TV

Bureau of Justice Statistics Violent Crime Rate Trends

Just absolutely shocking

And the murder rate by teens and young adults.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends in the U.S.: Age

Again absolutely shocking.

In fact you can see all the crime rates we record just absolutely skyrocket recently

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Key Facts: Crime Type

In fact I can't believe your source doesn't cite any rates over time since they support their side so fucking much don't they.

That article you posted gets things wrong, like the idea that that the military uses Doom to train people to use firearms (the very idea that using a mouse to shoot things in a video game can teach people how to use a rifle in real life is absolutely retarded).

Media Violence Research and Youth Violence Data: Why Do They Conflict? -- Olson 28 (2): 144 -- Acad Psychiatry (It's in the intro)

In fact read the whole article, it's from an academic journal which I think makes it more trustworthy than your random source.

and your place sites no sources

So do you have a source that youth crime is on the rise?
 
Last edited:
bonfire.JPG

Um.. this picture is from three days before. Thanks

Uhhhhh...that was the drunken terrorizing rampage through the town I was discussing earlier...that someone said never happened.

Wow, someone lit a small bonfire in the middle of the street, obviously not near enough to any structures to cause any damage! They obviously need to be shot!
 
Um.. this picture is from three days before. Thanks

Uhhhhh...that was the drunken terrorizing rampage through the town I was discussing earlier...that someone said never happened.

Wow, someone lit a small bonfire in the middle of the street, obviously not near enough to any structures to cause any damage! They obviously need to be shot!

My mother always told me: "Don't light stuff on fire in the street, or the National Guard might shoot you!"
 
For the last time allie the ohio guard did not shoot people who were burning down a building slated for demolition they shot people who were protesting.
 
They shot when they were SURROUNDED by students, and not until they thought they were being fired upon.
 
They shot when they were SURROUNDED by students, and not until they thought they were being fired upon.

Surrounded?


Killed (and approximate distance from the National Guard):
All four of those people were killed at point blank range.
 
Yes.

"...By noon, the entire Commons area contained approximately 3000 people. Although estimates are inexact, probably about 500 core demonstrators were gathered around the Victory Bell at one end of the Commons, another 1000 people were "cheerleaders" supporting the active demonstrators, and an additional 1500 people were spectators standing around the perimeter of the Commons. Across the Commons at the burned-out ROTC building stood about 100 Ohio National Guardsmen carrying lethal M-1 military rifles."
VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings

I understand why our leftards are so adamant that Big Bad Pigs attacked without provocation and killed innocent children....for years that was what was taught in the schools. It was a lie.


"...Most of the Guardsmen followed the students directly and soon found themselves somewhat trapped on the practice football field because it was surrounded by a fence. Yelling and rock throwing reached a peak as the Guard remained on the field for about ten minutes. Several Guardsmen could be seen huddling together, and some Guardsmen knelt and pointed their guns, but no weapons were shot at this time. The Guard then began retracing their steps from the practice football field back up Blanket Hill. As they arrived at the top of the hill, twenty-eight of the more than seventy Guardsmen turned suddenly and fired their rifles and pistols. Many guardsmen fired into the air or the ground. However, a small portion fired directly into the crowd. Altogether between 61 and 67 shots were fired in a 13 second period."
 
And:

"Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings."

VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings
 
And:

"Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings."

VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings

It was just a tragedy...plain and simple.
 
Absolutely.
But let's not pretend the big bad military attacked students out of the blue, for the sheer joy of killing. That's idiotic.
 
They shot when they were SURROUNDED by students, and not until they thought they were being fired upon.

They also were not surrounded, will stop making shit up.
You should have stayed with the throwing rocks reason, because that is the only thing that happened that you have listed.
 
And:

"Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings."

VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings

So there was 500 protestors in reality who were on the football field, the rest were pretty much spectators. And of those 500 prostestors how many had guns or any other deadly weapon?
 
Absolutely.
But let's not pretend the big bad military attacked students out of the blue, for the sheer joy of killing. That's idiotic.

Alright, I'll accept that.

As long as we stop insisting that the protesting students are somehow on par with the alleged plans of the Mutaree Terrorists.

And let's not pretend that the National Guard didn't over-react.
 
Last edited:
Where are you getting that there's a rise in youth violence?

Huh? There are hundreds of articles and reports. Just a simple google of the subject will allow you to take your pick. This is one that addresses all the reasons.

Teen Violence,*School Shootings, Internet Addiction, Online Gaming Addiction, Bullying,*TV Violence, Internet Predators & Teen Suicide:*Facts, Ideas, And Actions, by Ofer Zur, PhD., offered by Zur Institute for Psychologists, MFTs, SWs, Counselors an

You seriously believe violent video games/violent TV are responsible for actual violence? Really?

Well you may have something, just look at how much the violent crime rates have risen what with all this violent games and TV

Bureau of Justice Statistics Violent Crime Rate Trends

Just absolutely shocking

And the murder rate by teens and young adults.

Bureau of Justice Statistics Homicide trends in the U.S.: Age

Again absolutely shocking.

In fact you can see all the crime rates we record just absolutely skyrocket recently

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Key Facts: Crime Type

In fact I can't believe your source doesn't cite any rates over time since they support their side so fucking much don't they.

That article you posted gets things wrong, like the idea that that the military uses Doom to train people to use firearms (the very idea that using a mouse to shoot things in a video game can teach people how to use a rifle in real life is absolutely retarded).

Media Violence Research and Youth Violence Data: Why Do They Conflict? -- Olson 28 (2): 144 -- Acad Psychiatry (It's in the intro)

In fact read the whole article, it's from an academic journal which I think makes it more trustworthy than your random source.

and your place sites no sources

So do you have a source that youth crime is on the rise?

Well pardon me all to hell. I did say I picked just ONE link out of hundreds. So if you don't think violence heavily exposed in all the mediums available to teens these days has an effect on their psyches, how do you explain it? And try to tell me without having a cow. K?
 
And:

"Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings."

VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings

So there was 500 protestors in reality who were on the football field, the rest were pretty much spectators. And of those 500 prostestors how many had guns or any other deadly weapon?

Were you there, Luissa?
Also, please provide creditable evidence.

Thank you.
 
Absolutely.
But let's not pretend the big bad military attacked students out of the blue, for the sheer joy of killing. That's idiotic.

And it's idiotic for you to suggest anyone said that. Why the obsession over this incident anyway?
 
And:

"Guardsmen testified before numerous investigating commissions as well as in federal court that they felt the demonstrators were advancing on them in such a way as to pose a serious and immediate threat to the safety of the Guardsmen, and they therefore had to fire in self-defense. Some authors (e.g., Michener, 1971 and Grant and Hill, 1974) agree with this assessment. Much more importantly, federal criminal and civil trials have accepted the position of the Guardsmen. In a 1974 federal criminal trial, District Judge Frank Battisti dismissed the case against eight Guardsmen indicted by a federal grand jury, ruling at mid-trial that the government's case against the Guardsmen was so weak that the defense did not have to present its case. In the much longer and more complex federal civil trial of 1975, a jury voted 9-3 that none of the Guardsmen were legally responsible for the shootings."

VIETNAM WAR, Kent State Shootings

So there was 500 protestors in reality who were on the football field, the rest were pretty much spectators. And of those 500 prostestors how many had guns or any other deadly weapon?

Were you there, Luissa?
Also, please provide creditable evidence.

Thank you.

I don't have to, you already did.
Your own link says the people on the sides were spectators and "cheerleaders", while the actual protestors were across the commons from the national guard.
 
Well pardon me all to hell. I did say I picked just ONE link out of hundreds. So if you don't think violence heavily exposed in all the mediums available to teens these days has an effect on their psyches, how do you explain it? And try to tell me without having a cow. K?

Father Time is essentially correct though.

Violent Crime rates have been going down steadily since the introduction of video games, especially among young people.
 

Forum List

Back
Top