• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

Mass Shootings and Gun Debate 2018 Thread

JGrimez, stop lying

I heard about both of those stories on the news.

What the fuck did I lie about?
Please learn and understand the difference between the media reporting on a story, and then taking a story and broadcasting it round the clock to hammer an agenda into people's minds.

How many panels are the mainstream media going to have discussing "the effectiveness of armed guards protecting children at school" vs "we need gun control"
 
What the fuck did I lie about?
Please learn and understand the difference between the media reporting on a story, and then taking a story and broadcasting it round the clock to hammer an agenda into people's minds.

How many panels are the mainstream media going to have discussing "the effectiveness of armed guards protecting children at school" vs "we need gun control"

You said the mainstream media aren't reporting on the stories where the a shooter was neutralized. This is a lie.

News channels can play what they want to. Turn off the TV if you aren't happy with it.
 
Didnt hear about any of the near misses here but heard a lot about Trump flicking dandruff of some bloke and Kim Jong wearing lifts in his shoes.

It would balance things in a way to see the big picture.

But it never happens.
 
So, far right terrorism seems to be a pretty big problem in the USA.



New documents suggest Las Vegas shooter was conspiracy theorist – what we know

What’s the latest development in the Stephen Paddock story?

Stephen Paddock was the gunman who killed 58 people and wounded hundreds more last October, when he opened fire from the window of his room at the Mandalay hotel on the Las Vegas Strip.

Yesterday, following legal action from news organizations, the Las Vegas police department released a trove of documents on the investigation, including statements from witnesses and victims.

What did the document release tell us?

Mostly the documents contain harrowing accounts from victims of Stephen Paddock’s shooting spree. There is also an interview with Paddock’s wife. As police said in the press conference announcing the release, there is nothing definitive in the material about Paddock’s motives for the massacre.
But tantalizingly, people who encountered Paddock before his shooting say that he expressed conspiratorial, anti-government beliefs, which are characteristic of the far right.

In a handwritten statement, one woman says she sat near Paddock in a diner just a few days before the shooting, while out with her son. She said she heard him and a companion discussing the 25th anniversary of the Ruby Ridge standoff and the Waco siege. (Each of these incidents became touchstones for a rising anti-government militia movement in the 1990s.)

She says she heard him and his companion saying that courtroom flags with golden fringes are not real flags. The belief that gold-fringed flags are those of a foreign jurisdiction, or “admiralty flags”, is characteristic of so-called “sovereign citizens”, who believe, among other things, that the current US government, and its laws, are illegitimate.

“At the time,” her statement says, “I thought, ‘Strange guys’ and wanted to leave.”

Another man, himself currently in jail, says he met Paddock three weeks before the shooting for an abortive firearms transaction, in the carpark of a Bass Pro Shop. The man was selling schematic diagrams for an auto sear, a device that would convert semi-automatic weapons to full automatic fire. Paddock asked him to make the device for him, and the man refused.

At this point Paddock launched into a rant about “anti-government stuff … Fema camps”. Paddock said that the evacuation of people by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) after Hurricane Katrina was a a “dry run for law enforcement and military to start kickin’ down doors and ... confiscating guns”.

“Somebody has to wake up the American public and get them to arm themselves,” the man says Paddock told him. “Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.”

Why would someone be worried about Fema camps? Isn’t Fema there to help in emergencies?

Yes, but for decades Fema has been incorporated into conspiracy theories promulgated by the anti-government far right.

Some conspiracy-minded Americans believe that Fema’s emergency mission is a cover story. The real purpose of the agency is to build and maintain concentration camps, which will house dissident “patriots” after a declaration of martial law. The supposition is that the US government will turn on its citizens under the direction of the “New World Order”.

This sounds implausible. Where did this idea come from?

The short answer is that it has been a staple of the radical right for perhaps three decades.

The first version of the Fema camp conspiracy theory was in the newsletters of the far right “Posse Comitatus” movement in the early 1980s. It was an update, or an adaptation, of the fears of foreign subversion that have animated the American populist right since the high tide of nineteenth-century nativism.

Posse Comitatus, active especially in western states from the late 1960s, believed that the US was controlled by a Jewish conspiracy, which it referred to as ZOG (Zionist Occupation Government). It also promoted “Christian identity” theology, which held that the white race was the lost tribe of Israel, and that Jews were in league with Satan. At some point, they thought, America’s imposter government would round up and imprison white men.

Apart from developing anti-government beliefs, Posse Comitatus’s crank legal theories laid the groundwork for a still-flourishing “sovereign citizen” movement.

But the FEMA theory really took off during the rise of the militia movement in the 1990s. Movement entrepreneurs like John Trochmann of the Militia of Montana elaborated the story in newsletters and in his infamous “Blue Book”, which was filled with pictures allegedly showing camps, trains loaded with Russian tanks and the arrival of “black helicopters” in preparation for the supposedly imminent New World Order takeover.

Trochmann and others also claimed to have pictures of the facilities which would be used as concentration camps. These turned out to be army training grounds, federal prisons or as-yet unoccupied bases.

These theories were nevertheless prevalent in a movement that some scholars say had up to 5 million sympathizers at its height. Timothy McVeigh, who killed 168 people when he bombed a federal building in 1995, also emerged from this anti-government milieu.

Okay, but the militia movement faded away. Why are people still talking about this?

While the militia movement declined (or at least went underground) in the years following McVeigh’s bombing, the Fema conspiracy theory has been kept alive by some very canny entrepreneurs in rightwing media.

Glenn Beck might have endeavored to go legit since he started his own media company, but back in his blackboard days at Fox News, he peddled all manner of conspiracy thinking. In 2009, at the height of the Tea Party surge, he broached the topic on Fox & Friends, giving it more mainstream exposure than it had ever had.

But the most consistent and unapologetic supporter of the theory is Alex Jones, who has built a career – and a growing media empire – on pushing the idea that a global elite is subverting US sovereignty. Jones has been talking about Fema camps since he got his start on cable access TV in the 1990s.

These are just the high profile examples. The flourishing conspiracy community on platforms like YouTube and Reddit produces copious material “proving” the Fema camp theory.

Stephen Paddock would not have had to try too hard to come across assertions that the government is planning to imprison Americans.

So what does this mean for the Paddock investigation?

Police are not jumping to any conclusions about Paddock’s motives, and nor should we. But it is striking that there is evidence that he, like so many mass shooters, may have nurtured the ideas of the conspiracy-minded far right.

Often such beliefs are viewed as harmless, and increasingly they have been normalized by the success of figures like Alex Jones. But we need to start taking seriously the possibility that they radicalize some people towards violence.

Link
 
"Did you know:

There were two school shootings prevented by armed guard this week. But that barely got any media coverage.
Instead the focus is on the carnage, and the narrative is now that guns need to be taken away.
The news manipulates minds to advance a gun control agenda."

Alllways a conspiracy. And at the same time I've seen people here complain about low media coverage for school shootings that weren't stopped but still didn't get any coverage.

Unless enough people die, they don't air it. It's not a political agenda, it's money. More sensational, more bloody, more worth covering. Which isn't to say the media outlets don't have a political agenda, they do, just that this isn't an example of it, it's an example of flawed thinking that says "anything that remotely might be evidence of conspiracy is evidence of conspiracy until proven beyond absolutely any doubt and probably not even then.". Confirmation bias in its most extreme form.
 
To be fair, I doubt the whole conspiracy theory angle that jgrimez seems to have Ben encumbered with. It's just another pov.


Media has always been both biased and sensationalist. It's worse now with social media.

I don't watch current affairs shows or the news anymore it's full of total bullshit and while it's great people here are passionate about their views being heard it's not worth being angry and abrasive about.


I'm tired and not directing this at anyone just in general.
 
"conspiracy theory" is some bullshit that people say when they don't have an argument.

The term was created by the CIA in the 60s to shape public opinion - fact.
Project Mockingbird put CIA agents into the media to shape public opinion - fact.

Saying that 'the news manipulates minds to advance a gun control agenda' is an opinion based on fact.

I'm getting sick of being labeled a conspiracy theorist. It's an ad hom and an insult. I don't call people dumbfucklibtards.
I went over this in the other thread. No need to rant about how much smarter you are than i̶n̶s̶e̶r̶t̶ ̶g̶r̶o̶u̶p̶ ̶l̶a̶b̶e̶l̶ conspiracy theorists every single time just to feel that you've discredited an alternative opinion.

Didnt hear about any of the near misses here but heard a lot about Trump flicking dandruff of some bloke and Kim Jong wearing lifts in his shoes.

It would balance things in a way to see the big picture.

But it never happens.

Not going to happen with a certain segment of news media.
Have you heard of NXIVM? I would not be surprised if you haven't because everyone I ask has no idea.
But it's only one of the biggest and most salacious scandals that we've seen that would definitely get massive ratings and make news networks a ton of money.
When the story first broke CNN did not have one article on their website. It was only until a month later, when Allison Mack was arrested, that they published a piece.
 
JGrimez, please chill out. If you want to post views held by certain kinds of people, you shouldn't be shocked if you're lumped in with them.

I get how that feels-- I've never been labeled the way I have here (by Trump supporters, frankly).

At the end of the day, you are who you are, and that eventually shows through. So don't stress. :)

If you must, then please tone down the language. Yes, it's infractable.
 
It really doesn't work to complain about being called a conspiracy theorist while also advancing a conspiracy theory ABOUT the label "conspiracy".

Man,im not arguing that the media doesn't try an advance an agenda, I told you that I agree that it does. What I'm saying is that in this particular situation it is far far more likely that they didn't air it because it's not newsworthy unless enough people die.

Tell me, how many did die in the two that were stopped by a ccw holder or whatever. If it'd much less than 8 or so, it's not gonna be aired. If it's under 6 total it's got no chance unless one of those 6 was the kid of someone notable. If it's say,15+, then I'll agree it's highly suspicious and the most likely explanation is advancing a political agenda.

And yes, this does mean by definition, if ccw holders and such do save lives it also means people don't hear about it, which is bullshit, but it's what the news always does. The viewership comes first. The agenda second. You just bias the article when it's notable and you have an agenda. Like when the edited the Zimmerman 911 call. Or photoshopped the pictures.

You won't get me to agree it was the CIA but I'll agree it's agenda pushing.
 
Last edited:
"conspiracy theory" is some bullshit that people say when they don't have an argument.

The term was created by the CIA in the 60s to shape public opinion - fact.
Project Mockingbird put CIA agents into the media to shape public opinion - fact.

Saying that 'the news manipulates minds to advance a gun control agenda' is an opinion based on fact.

I'm getting sick of being labeled a conspiracy theorist. It's an ad hom and an insult. I don't call people dumbfucklibtards.
I went over this in the other thread. No need to rant about how much smarter you are than i̶n̶s̶e̶r̶t̶ ̶g̶r̶o̶u̶p̶ ̶l̶a̶b̶e̶l̶ conspiracy theorists every single time just to feel that you've discredited an alternative opinion.



Not going to happen with a certain segment of news media.
Have you heard of NXIVM? I would not be surprised if you haven't because everyone I ask has no idea.
But it's only one of the biggest and most salacious scandals that we've seen that would definitely get massive ratings and make news networks a ton of money.
When the story first broke CNN did not have one article on their website. It was only until a month later, when Allison Mack was arrested, that they published a piece.

Quit calling it the NXIVM whatever and call the "personal and professional development group" from which some perv selected certain women and sexually assaulted them and that the Smallville actress was in (actually just the Smallville actress part). Then people will know what you're talking about, unless they don't keep up even with the MSM.
 
Quit calling it the NXIVM whatever and call the "personal and professional development group" from which some perv selected certain women and sexually assaulted them and that the Smallville actress was in (actually just the Smallville actress part). Then people will know what you're talking about, unless they don't keep up even with the MSM.

NXIVM should be a household name.
Keith Raniere should be a household name.
Everyone should know about how he branded his initials onto the girls he brainwashed into his cult.
How they were engaging in sex trafficking (possibly with children) and human smuggling.
Everyone should know how Mack was trying to lure big Hollywood names into the cult.
Everyone should know how one of their doctors was performing sick human experiments on unsuspecting victims in the US
and everyone should know about the Dalai Lama being buddy-buddy with Raniere and giving NXIVM a million dollars.

Why wouldn't CNN report on it? Nobody can answer that, apart from maybe admitting that it's 'strange'.
Let me guess - I'm a conspiracy theorist for asking that question.
Obvious coverup is obvious.

Back on-topic: there's a reason they don't give the same amount of airtime to stories where a good guy saves the day.
And don't tell me it's because of ratings because that is absolute bullshit.
People love a hero story.
Even attempted school shootings are a big deal.
They show the deaths of innocents because the goal is gun control
 
For fucking sake
I've fucking heard this for well over ten years and that's only cause I'm not that old. When is this fucking gun control gonna actually fucking happen!

Gun controls as bad as the second coming of Jesus or the apocalypse. Always soon but never quite happens.
 
The fact that some of the school shootings had been prevented by somebody armed at the school shouldn't exactly be something to celebrate. Americans should ask themselves why things like this hardly ever happen in other wealthy, developed nations, whereas in the USA it seems to happen very often, so much as to the point that only those with the bloodiest, most horrific outcomes get widely reported on...

I am happy to live in a place with tighter gun control (allthough it is not very hard to own one), but on the other hand, I believe it is some fundamental problems in your society, which makes these violent outbursts happen that often. But still, I think it is a bit crass from many gun owners and advocates to expect that everybody should be okay with the fact that one can buy a firearm in a supermarket without any kind of bureaucracy or regulations behind that. I mean come on, is it really to much to ask for background checks and other kinds of assessements before getting handed a fucking weapon that can kill dozens of people in a short period of time? As stated before, everyone seems to agree that regulating motorized vehicles is at least a necessity...
 
Uhh. There ARE background checks. It's called the nics system. But it's not like you have to submit to a psych eval for months. Just adding regulations doesn't automatically help.


You're acting like it's totally unregulated, which is crap. And before anyone says it, almost none of these mass shootings are weapons from gun shows. Even most gun show sales are nics checked too.
 
Re: NVIXM: Search using "Smallville actress cult CNN".

OT: Bagseed makes an interesting point. I do wonder if the federal authorities are questioning school shooting suspects and getting information about why the shootings happen in a general sense.

General comment: unfortunately there is a huge illegal gun trade in America, and as long as there is a legal one, there will be a parallel market. Similar to prescription abuse.

SJ: interesting post on the Mandalay Bay/Las Vegas shooter being an alt-right conspiracy theorist. It's almost a relief though, to hear some kind of motive.
 
In the most recent school shooting, people are once again saying they're not surprised, the guy who did it was making social media posts holding guns, talking about killing people, that he was "born to kill", etc etc. So once again the warning signs were there.

Yeah Bagseed, there are background checks. However we have a "gun show" loophole which to be is absurd. So I guess you CAN escape background checks. Most people who buy guns do so after a 10 day waiting period (at least in many states, I'm not really very informed on current gun laws as a non-gun owner) and a background check. But yeah, there are no guns in supermarkets. There ARE a tremendous number of guns on the black market... they cost more but anyone can get one easily. But that's just because we have such a gun culture. And also that felons are not allowed to own guns legally so there is a big black market for that.
 
The problem with warning signs is that the vast majority of the time they don't mean anything. We don't have the resources to go after all of them. Not to mention that doing so improperly could have all sorts of harmful side effects.

Point is, it's all very very complicated. And people utterly detest complicated. It's completely at odds with how we think about things. We think using a divide and conquer system. Breaking complex problems into small ones.

Honestly, I hold out virtually no hope of the school shooting phenomenon being solved in America in the remotely foreseeable future. And the reason I think that is I don't think it is possible to prevent it without substantially reducing gun availability. Most school shooters don't get their guns with the gun show loophole, cause it's mostly political theater. They don't get it from the black market. They don't get it legally. They get it from other people they know. Usually a parent. Which means to effectively cut off the guns you'd have to either cut off the gun supply or mandate how they're used, and you're simply never gonna get either of those two ideas into law. You just won't. Even the antigun lobby knows they can't get that, so they don't ask for that, they ask for the thing they can sell, an assault weapon ban. Simple, low constitutional issues, relatively uncontroversial.

So school shootings will keep happening. Something I take some comfort in is in knowing it's really a very small number of deaths statistically speaking. It's totally irrational to care so much about school shooting victims but so little about so many other more likely ways children die. Understandable sure, and small comfort, but it is irrational.

Which is why I try not to concern myself with anything other than the overall stats and what can be done about them. And why I devote very little time anymore thinking about school shootings politically.
 
What the fuck did I lie about?
you wrote:
There were two school shootings prevented by armed guard this week. But that barely got any media coverage.

maybe you did not intentionally lie but the idea that barely any media reported is nonsense.

How many panels are the mainstream media going to have discussing "the effectiveness of armed guards protecting children at school" vs "we need gun control"
i don't know but i expect the kids at parkland would have some opinions on the former.

alasdair
 
Top