Mass shooting in Buffalo NY. (1 Viewer)

[HburgSaints]

Be a big boy and actually make your point.

My point is, we become so easily outraged when we can attach ourselves to being the victim of a crime. But, when we can look at something and see ourselves as part of the problem, we bury our heads in the sand. Case in point, the twitter outrage for what happened today was substantially more hyper focused than what happened last night in Milwaukee.

 

[HburgSaints]

Maybe this is an extreme point of view but here it goes. Why do we need a lengthy court case here? The guy live streamed it, its clearly him and he posted his why to a manifesto. What does a court case even matter here? It's a waste of tax dollars. Do we really care at this point he's "disturbed or mentally ill?" He should go straight to a public hanging instead of living a life tucked away in a jail cell.

There is nothing to discover here, there is no shroud of doubt to uncover for a state prosecutor to chip away at in a court of law. Do we as a society even care what defense some defense lawyer is gonna present? Heck no, straight to hanging. This dude is straight up evil and should be shown no common decency. Why waste peoples time selecting juror's and save tax payers money?

Because there are people out there who adamantly oppose the death penalty. But people like the guy today, should not be allowed to see the dawn of tomorrow. I’ll never understand someone who lobbies for the monster that took those lives today being able to live out the rest of his life.

 

[Poison]

Plus, if one truly examines the long history behind European-styled gun control laws and restrictions, they werent done with benevolent, kind motives, no,most of them were put in place to prop up tyrannical kings, authoritian regimes, autocratic rulers who wanted to use access to arms control or.forbidding to lessen the chances of successful religious, ethnic and political revolts like the German Peasants Revolts of 1524, or industrial working resentment in the 19th and 20th centuries.

I’m pretty sure after a guy went nuts and killed 35 unarmed people in a mass shooting down here in 1996, which prompted the government to require people like my dad to hand back his firearms, they weren’t doing it to prop up a European autocracy.

Haven’t had a mass shooting here since, for what it’s worth.

Also, how effective exactly do you think your weapons would be against the firepower of the US army?

 

[Saintman2884]

I’m pretty sure after a guy went nuts and killed 35 unarmed people in a mass shooting down here in 1996, which prompted the government to require people like my dad to hand back his firearms, they weren’t doing it to prop up a European autocracy.

Haven’t had a mass shooting here since, for what it’s worth.

Also, how effective exactly do you think your weapons would be against the firepower of the US army?

Try to imagine a series of Waco-styled standoffs, popping up all over the country, without number, by every far-right wing nutjobs, groups like Oathkeepers, Proud Boys, Boogaloos, who would see any government attempt to stricter gun control laws as one more infringement on "their" freedoms, and then you'd have international media outlets with 24/7 coverage, social media outlets, commentators all focusing on A U.S. GOVERNMENT turning his vast military superiority and weaponry on its own people? Do you think that government's actions will be wholesale favorably shown or applauded, or seen with favorable.reception worldwide, even in Australia's Sky News? Just like with the WACO aftermath, there probably would.attempted assassinations, bombings, rise of even more infringement extremist far-right groups, terrorist groups or retaliatios like the Oklahoma City bombing by Timothy McVeigh. McVeigh's main reason for that bombing was revenge for how FBI/ATF law enforcement handled the Branch Davidians cult in 1993. If US government ever turns its.vast firepower on A certain segment or subgeoups in this country that are heavily armed, well-trained, and have this willingness and dedication to be "martyred" because their opposing an unlawful, tyrannical government, you have a very real scenario of bunch of Waco's just ready to blow up, and far more dangerous than anything David Koresh could've posed in 1993.

 

[Saintman2884]

I’m pretty sure after a guy went nuts and killed 35 unarmed people in a mass shooting down here in 1996, which prompted the government to require people like my dad to hand back his firearms, they weren’t doing it to prop up a European autocracy.

Haven’t had a mass shooting here since, for what it’s worth.

Also, how effective exactly do you think your weapons would be against the firepower of the US army?

Try researching the 1524 German Peasants Revolt, then how successive European kings, monarchs, authoritian regimes, how farmers, even lower mobility in most European countries couldn't own or possess swords, pick axes, or sharp stabbing weapons since before the Crusades, how over centuries of repression, serfdom, pogroms, many potential revolutions or rebellions were crushed because of who owned and possessed the most powerful, technological weaponry, tactics, and who didn't.

You want another good example? Try researching examining and researching the St. barthlamedow's Day Massacre of 1574, thats when the French ancien regime and the Catholic Church declared open war on the French Hugeunots, French Protestants. Hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children were butchered, raped, and murdered without warning, sometimes in their homes, defenseless, entire French cities and towns had their streets covered in blood. It was such a brutal, vicious example of state-sanctioned, sponsored murder, rape and systematic slaughter was so heinous that even Ivan the Terrible of Russia condemned it and briefly called for a European coalition of monarchs to overthrow France's Bourbon king in extreme anti-Huguenot nationwide purging.

 

[Heathen Saint]

Because there are people out there who adamantly oppose the death penalty. But people like the guy today, should not be allowed to see the dawn of tomorrow. I’ll never understand someone who lobbies for the monster that took those lives today being able to live out the rest of his life.

It’s simple, actually.

We both agree he shouldn’t live out the rest of his life. I simply believe the state playing the part of literal life-taker is a dangerous precedent (one we’re oddly obsessed with as a culture) and a relic of barbarism we should leave in the past. Having even a smidgen of the same ruthless disregard for life or wanting to see it bestowed upon the killer is understandable but ultimately wrong IMO. Let him rot in a cell.

 

[Heathen Saint]

Try researching the 1524 German Peasants Revolt, then how successive European kings, monarchs, authoritian regimes, how farmers, even lower mobility in most European countries couldn't own or possess swords, pick axes, or sharp stabbing weapons since before the Crusades, how over centuries of repression, serfdom, pogroms, many potential revolutions or rebellions were crushed because of who owned and possessed the most powerful, technological weaponry, tactics, and who didn't.

You want another good example? Try researching examining and researching the St. barthlamedow's Day Massacre of 1574, thats when the French ancien regime and the Catholic Church declared open war on the French Hugeunots, French Protestants. Hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children were butchered, raped, and murdered without warning, sometimes in their homes, defenseless, entire French cities and towns had their streets covered in blood. It was such a brutal, vicious example of state-sanctioned, sponsored murder, rape and systematic slaughter was so heinous that even Ivan the Terrible of Russia condemned it and briefly called for a European coalition of monarchs to overthrow France's Bourbon king in extreme anti-Huguenot nationwide purging.

You didn’t answer the question about the citizens being able to protect themselves from the state. They can’t, at least not if the state cared to do anything. Swords aren’t guns. If that’s the original argument or one of them to be had for owning one of these weapons, the battle for “2nd amendment” was lost long ago.

 

[Thunderchild]

I’m pretty sure after a guy went nuts and killed 35 unarmed people in a mass shooting down here in 1996, which prompted the government to require people like my dad to hand back his firearms, they weren’t doing it to prop up a European autocracy.

Haven’t had a mass shooting here since, for what it’s worth.

Also, how effective exactly do you think your weapons would be against the firepower of the US army?

That would be quite a lot more difficult to do here. 650,000 guns were confiscated in Australia. 1.7 million people have gun licenses just in the state of Texas. Most of those have more than 1 gun per license and no telling how many guns are unlicensed.

The sheer volume alone would make confiscation prohibitive. Not to consider the very real probability of armed resistance to confiscation and the probability that large sections our armed forces and/or LEOs would balk at carrying out that order.

The culture and huge numbers of fire arms (more than 393 million civilian-owned firearms in the United States), make it virtually, if not literally, impossible.

Then add in politics and the vast number of guns illegally smuggled into this country every year and this is nothing like a paltry 650,000 gun confiscation program.

 

[soupcan dan]

a live feed of his lifetime internment would be worthy of a glance.

 

[BarBar]

Try researching the 1524 German Peasants Revolt, then how successive European kings, monarchs, authoritian regimes, how farmers, even lower mobility in most European countries couldn't own or possess swords, pick axes, or sharp stabbing weapons since before the Crusades, how over centuries of repression, serfdom, pogroms, many potential revolutions or rebellions were crushed because of who owned and possessed the most powerful, technological weaponry, tactics, and who didn't.

You want another good example? Try researching examining and researching the St. barthlamedow's Day Massacre of 1574, thats when the French ancien regime and the Catholic Church declared open war on the French Hugeunots, French Protestants. Hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women, and children were butchered, raped, and murdered without warning, sometimes in their homes, defenseless, entire French cities and towns had their streets covered in blood. It was such a brutal, vicious example of state-sanctioned, sponsored murder, rape and systematic slaughter was so heinous that even Ivan the Terrible of Russia condemned it and briefly called for a European coalition of monarchs to overthrow France's Bourbon king in extreme anti-Huguenot nationwide purging.

What does this have to do with anything occuring today, 500 years later?

 

[Dragon]

Strict, European-styled gun control laws might also be challenged in court and any such law would be overturned and declared unconstitutional. Don't believe me, look at their recent actions with a federal court judge ruling California's Semi-automatic ban or restrictions got overturned. Its a little bit more complicated then just
saying we don't believe in rational, logical solutions to serious socio-political problems.


Plus, if one truly examines the long history behind European-styled gun control laws and restrictions, they werent done with benevolent, kind motives, no,most of them were put in place to prop up tyrannical kings, authoritian regimes, autocratic rulers who wanted to use access to arms control or.forbidding to lessen the chances of successful religious, ethnic and political revolts like the German Peasants Revolts of 1524, or industrial working resentment in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Using 200 years old laws as reason for not protecting your citizents TODAY makes absolutely no sense

Those laws from that time has nothing to do with todays laws. You need a drivers license to drive a car because the state wants to be sure that you can drive safely and understand the laws. A car need a licence plate so that if it it is involved in an accident it is possible to find the responsible owner and yet some places you can buy a semi-automatic weapon without any forms of registration or proof that you are qualified to handle a gun. In Europe most of the countries have laws requiring the same for cars and guns

 

[Super44]

Shooter apparently broadcast on Twitch.

10 confirmed dead.

Self proclaimed white supremacist that had a manifesto.

So effn tragic.


Lots of info here

I really do not understand the hate some human beings can have for others. At times, SOME humans can be the most ignorant living being that walks on the face of this planet. It sickens me to the core, that some of us can just have so little regard for civility, human life, respect for all others, that nothing else really matters to me anymore.

How can such a young person, have so much hate and hostility, at such a relatively young age? What in the world is the catalyst, that causes this end result? That, to me, is the big question!

Something he actually experienced himself? Was he targeted (bullied) by others and when he was able, took it out on innocent others? Was he enticed/encouraged/influenced by older people, who tainted his young mind? I mean, WHAT? Just sickening.

 

[Super44]

Because there are people out there who adamantly oppose the death penalty. But people like the guy today, should not be allowed to see the dawn of tomorrow. I’ll never understand someone who lobbies for the monster that took those lives today being able to live out the rest of his life.

Agreed, 100%!

 

[Super44]

I’m pretty sure after a guy went nuts and killed 35 unarmed people in a mass shooting down here in 1996, which prompted the government to require people like my dad to hand back his firearms, they weren’t doing it to prop up a European autocracy.

Haven’t had a mass shooting here since, for what it’s worth.

Also, how effective exactly do you think your weapons would be against the firepower of the US army?

You really want to create a civil war? Try taking guns away from the 99% law abiding citizens, that follow the law to the T! The U.S. military, including the various National Guard units, are made up of people who own personal firearms themselves. Any attempt at seizing personal guns/firearms, will lead to an all out civil war. No way it will ever happen.

Talk about shutting down a country! Talk about shutting down the world economy, because the U.S. would be in total uncontrolled mayhem.

I do not own a gun, but I know what attempting to seize all guns would mean.

 

[HburgSaints]

It’s simple, actually.

We both agree he shouldn’t live out the rest of his life. I simply believe the state playing the part of literal life-taker is a dangerous precedent (one we’re oddly obsessed with as a culture) and a relic of barbarism we should leave in the past. Having even a smidgen of the same ruthless disregard for life or wanting to see it bestowed upon the killer is understandable but ultimately wrong IMO. Let him rot in a cell.

But here is the other issue. His ideology will persist. Prisons are a microcosm of a terrorist society. When you have as much proof as you do about what he did, there isn’t much doubt in the way he went about his crime. Letting him live, possibly in a general population allows him to target more African Americans in prison.