Shootings in San Bernardino Ca
- Thread starter Hong Kong Phooey
- Start date
You must be confusing me with someone else.....
Then we can continue.
First off, we've never had interaction before until today.
And the first thing you did, was chime in AFTER a situation had been handled, and comment sarcastically with a "retard" comment.
That's really not nice, and technically against Community Standards for this website, as owners and creators of the standard have agreed to a forum built on respect of others first, regardless of their opinions, to set it apart from other sites that don't share the same goal.
But as "big boys" go, fine. Not funny, but fine.
And because we're big boys, you'll get a big boy response.
My post was as follows:
"- Social services center, gun free zone, disabled people serviced, wearing body armor, has assault rifles, unidentifiable perpetrators, many people killed wounded by guns.
In this climate, with this timing, in that place.
IF there is no known motive,
IF they escaped in a black SUV,
IF they drove away slow,
IF all these factors are true,
this is a perfect false flag attack."
And yours, AFTER the situation had come to a close. Your only post to that point...
"And now we know the facts, we know you went full retard....."
My re-iteration to you:
"Maaaaybe you should read my post again, thoroughly.
And maaaaaybe you should realize it's a real-time forum where exchanges of thought occur, not claims of fact."
And again, you:
"Your post contained a lot of "Ifs".
What I don't understand is WHY anyone would use a devastating tragedy to spew Alex Jones type conspiracy.
The term "false flag" is a false flag in and of itself since nothing that has ever been called a 'false flag' has ever been proven to be a false flag.
I think energy is best spent sending condolences to victims and trying to figure out what needs to be done to help end this recurring mass violence. before it becomes (more) common place than it already it."
"Your post contained a lot of "Ifs".
You state my post contains a lot of "Ifs".
Yes, it did. And those "ifs" did not come true.
-IF the perpetrators are unidentifiable
-IF they escape
Well, they didn't. They were caught, identified, and killed.
Those are big "if's"(literally), and I even CAPITALIZED them for clarification to avoid miscommunication.
So why did you even comment, and furthermore disrespectfully?
It's like a kid sticking out their tongue and saying "neener neener neener I told you so", when they didn't say anything, EVER.
And you to point out those "ifs" as if they were not abundantly and purposefully clear?
"What I don't understand is WHY anyone would use a devastating tragedy to spew Alex Jones type conspiracy."
This, is a forum.
We don't "use" tragedies, for any "Alex Jones type conspiracies", we discuss things, everyone, no matter what they are.
A tragedy(even devastating ones), satire, news, fights, chicks, dudes, sun. moon, stars and all. It is an exchange of what we are thinking.
What YOU don't understand today, you may tomorrow. That is precisely why the community standards are what they are. Because people change their minds. And rather than insult the person, we debate the position, to keep a civil position for future discussion.
The term "false flag" is a false flag in and of itself since nothing that has ever been called a 'false flag' has ever been proven to be a false flag."
Fine, that's your opinion. Maybe you want an official government release from the thousands of times these have occurred throughout human history?
Here's an example from a powerful documentary detailing the long and glorious tradition of false flags.
"I think energy is best spent sending condolences to victims and trying to figure out what needs to be done to help end this recurring mass violence. before it becomes (more) common place than it already it."
^^^^
That there is what I call "fronting" and it's ridiculous.
You're implying there is a choice to either take that EXHAUSTING energy used to post a thought and actually post it, or use that energy and track down victims thousands of miles away(of whose names haven't been released), amidst the third largest shooting in 20+ years and a FIRESTORM of media and police, and make sure they get my condolences? Or maybe find a meaningless social account to post some words that they will never read, see, or hear?
Maybe set-up a go-fund-me?
In other words, shut up?
That was a fluff showboating statement on your part.
The second part of that statement is the most puzzling.
"trying to figure out what needs to be done to help end this recurring mass violence. before it becomes (more) common place than it already it."
It's like you didn't even stop to think, that when people relay their thoughts, that's EXACTLY, what they're doing.
They are trying to figure out what EXACTLY is going on, to stop it in the future.
Whether that fits the narrative you're comfortable with or not.
EVERYONE with a heart feels the same initially about these tragedies.
Because others do not think the same initially, does not mean either thought process is wrong.
It simply means when the latter types their thoughts, they should pay careful attention to convey those thoughts in CAPITAL letters.
I'd rather have a pleasant relationship with everyone on the forum. All forums, and life.
There is nothing beneficial being done in painting someone else in a bad light.
It just means when something really matters, they'll tune out, when it means the most.
There are plenty of people who don't agree with me, nor I with them, but we keep it civil without showboating.
Zeph for instance doesn't showcase disrespect for others or myself, because he can light me up with rainbows like Richard Simmons in Ireland until hell freezes over, but keeps it civil.
It'd be better for you to do that
P
Punch
Guest
Been there for some raves, but that's it. Shame what happened.
Loss of life is always a horrible waste, I figured by this point that would go without saying. Especially when at the time we were posting last evening, we had virtually no facts about the surrounding story. Having said that, if the media will report outright lies about the categorization of firearms used, what else are they lying about? This wasn't a preliminary report, this was a statement from a law enforcement official, one who absolutely would've known the difference. In this day and age of accessibility, we need to not only expect, but demand, accurate reporting. Intentionally misreporting is a very, very big deal.
One thing I have noticed this morning is that there is a lot more news coverage on this shooting than any other this year, and the national news agencies all seem to be pushing the same narrative without all the facts. Last night, AP reported IS was claiming responsibility on twitter, but I'm not hearing it today. All of the news agencies seem to be pushing gun control now that Obama has spoken. The coverage seems coordinated and it's dominating the news cycle on a level other shootings haven't since sandy hook. Something smells fishy.
It should never go without saying. I realize its happening so much over there, you probably grow numb to it.
But when it seems that the knee-jerk-reaction "not my guns" is the only thing that matters for people, it just feels wrong to me. Similar as if people would only ask: "Are the shooters black? I'm sure they were black! What they reported he was mixed-race? Still black to me!"
You know? Its about priorities and agendas. And both sides of the gun-discussion should shut the fuck up for a while.
If they report it wrong, it will come out. At least wait with that political shit until the bodies are cold?.. Have some respect for the victims.
all of those are tragic...but the sandy hook elementary is ott. little tiny kids..i wish that was the proverbial line that caused america to do something significant to stop these from happening.
i was reading a while back about the mass shooting in Australia. about 35 people were killed in port arthur. the only good part about that tragedy is was that it seemed to get everybody on board along with the gov't to make sure it didn't happen again. how did you manage a sweeping gun control law?
But it probably is an automatism, it would be nice if everybody could show a little more sovereignty and not try to use this for their own agendas right away. It probably is impossible, and it seems it was rather reactionary. So, I didn't try to talk down to anybody, just, from my perspective it seems weird.
Another point to that is though, if you are so hell-bent on trying to say they did this without assault-rifles, well, my first question is, what if they indeed would have had assault-rifles?
It would have been much worse, wouldn't it? And they are as easy to come by as the other weapons in some states, no?
I can see the argument: At least they didn't have assault-rifles, we better make sure the next guys don't either.
This points a target at all guns rather than just at those specific types. Is that really what you would prefer?
So I don't see how you could have a "win" in that argument on that note.
And I'm an outsider to this and not trying to pick sides. Just saying. The whole discussion seems weird to me.
Another point to that is though, if you are so hell-bent on trying to say they did this without assault-rifles, well, my first question is, what if they indeed would have had assault-rifles?
It would have been much worse, wouldn't it? And they are as easy to come by as the other weapons in some states, no?
I can see the argument: At least they didn't have assault-rifles, we better make sure the next guys don't either.
This points a target at all guns rather than just at those specific types. Is that really what you would prefer?
So I don't see how you could have a "win" in that argument on that note.
And I'm an outsider to this and not trying to pick sides. Just saying. The whole discussion seems weird to me.
agreed...i think the specifics of which guns were used is irrelevant to a point. and unfortunately i think you're right about the desensitization of breaking news about another mass shooting in the U.S. the first 10 times...you're like OH SHIT...the subsequent every other week tragedies are more about..rest in peace, bless their families type of feeling, which is a very sad way to be.
i've mentioned this once before...but now our schools run internal lock down drills where we practice locking doors/windows, pulling shades.. and then huddle together -basically on top of each other in the corner and maintain 100% silence. kind of a drag that we have to practice not getting killed while in school.
Yeah sounds like the cold-war-drills against nuclear attacks. Crazy. And sad.
I was only a kid man but we had way less guns per capita to start with, not much of a gun culture and they paid money to get them off people. That might be it.
i didn't know when it happened...was reading about mass shooting in the U.S and it linked to the port arthor story...and mentioned autralia made serious move to cut the shit.
Question of my own, what's the difference between changing The Bill of Rights and changing the law?
Of course Australians gave up their guns for money, they are a criminal colony, everything is for sale. Probably stole the guns back after....
Last edited:
I never said anything about gun rights, or made any political comments. It's you who's giving my comments that narrative. To me not demanding accurate reporting is one of the most disrespectful things people can do at a time like this, as it all but guarantees justice won't be properly served for the victims.
i'm no expert on goverment...but since ya asked. feel free to fact check me..
the bill of rights limits nat'l gov't power and is meant to protect individuals' liberty...it's a federal ordeal. any changes to the constitution has to be done on a national level. states have their own laws too..so if it needs changing only that state is involved.
are you specifically talking about the 2nd amendment, the right to a militia to defend the free state and to be armed?
that's a convo that get's had around here a lot...
the first 10 amendments (bill of rights) were written in such a different political climate than we have today....i think the original interpretation of # 2 doesn't apply as it did in 1790ish ...not sure regular ol' citizen needs an arsenal. that's why we have the national guard. but that's my thought process..
states would have to get on board with gun control to make any national changes...because congress has to have at least a 2/3rds vote from the reps and the senate to make amendments..
seems next to impossible to me because so many people use modern context to interpret the 2nd amendment ..not too many people believe as I do that it's sole intent was to have an armed militia as a new nation protecting itself from the king's men and the english gov't.. not random joe's right to own a whichever gun that kills rhinos. i mean seriously..we do have the national guard.
valid point...irresponsible and inaccurate reporting can cause a backlash of incorrect opinions from the entire world.
it can make matters much worse..
There has only been one amendment to the constitution that has been repealed and that was prohibition of alchohol.
They aren't trying to repeal the second amendment, just the way it interpreted. You have to remember when it was written we were basically a rag tag army that used personal hunting firearms to go to war with Britain. Its not so much of restrictions and shit with most gun owners, its where does it stop? Anti gun people are basically abolitionists so there is just no middle ground on either side. Austrailia has a gun ban but they also have 1/10th the population of the US and never had a law that was I terpreted one way for 250 years, but now they are trying to say something different. The places most of these shootings happen are where gun laws are the strictest.
For me its about personal accountability. As soon as that shit happened they blamed the guns, not the asshole pulling the trigger. Are guns easy to get? Yes they are. Would more laws or tougher prison sentences make it harder to get? Probably not to be honest. It will just make the black market more expensive, that's about it. Pass a law banning guns in the US and you will be amazed at how many were lost on fishing trips.
Its actually been 7 "active shooter incidents"
In the last 5 months, according to Fox News
We all know fox news isn't real news though.
I see what you did there. Those are big numbers, maybe CNN could quote that number. I flip back and forth between lib/dem and rep influenced media outlets. I wouldnt believe one over the other and i filter out whatever propaganda that may be influencing the news.
Syed Rizwan Farook
Tashfeen Malik
Oh.... What a surprise
Police Search For Motive Behind San Bernardino Shooting
Tashfeen Malik
Oh.... What a surprise
Police Search For Motive Behind San Bernardino Shooting
Oh look more violent very religious Muslims.