Today's mass shooting in the US

[jsmoke]

Oh look, another Trump supporter doing what we've come to expect from Trump supporters. File this under 'news the conservative media elites will try to bury.'

That's pretty presumptive by your standards no?

You've usually got Perry Mason like evidence to prove/disprove a crime. This guy happened to be outside a center so far.

 

[Sankari]

This guy happened to be outside a center so far.

...armed. And he was arrested for it.

Please note that I haven't actually accused him of a crime.

 

[VincentHanna]

Internal memo at Walmart:

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1159235488898830338

FYI - Walmart sells guns and ammo.

Edit - And I'm sure some joker just moved this advertising board, but i'm not 100%:

 

[jsmoke]

But is having guns in Walmart to them not a bit like tesco selling fireworks. It's a tradition that's been around for so long it's normalised. We just don't get it as were so not used to it. A bit like Australia and its dangerous creatures.

 

[StriderX]

So is shooting up a walmart also a tradition, what about a school, festival or nightclub? Are those just traditions?

 

[Roar87]

I don't agree with what Trump said about violent video games being responsible, although I can actually see someone who is already mentally unstable sat playing something like Call of Duty and obsessing over the guns and perhaps that could feed the obsession a little bit, but no more than any other medium might, like movies, magazines, TV shows or even books. Walmart are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Why wouldn't Walmart sell guns and ammo though? If they don't then other people will still sell them, and they'll lose money. They're in a highly competitive industry and can't afford to lose money. No one is going to shop there who isn't already because they stop selling guns, and people aren't going to stop shopping there because they do still sell guns, or very few will anyway.

 

[VincentHanna]

Why wouldn't Walmart sell guns and ammo though? If they don't then other people will still sell them, and they'll lose money. They're in a highly competitive industry and can't afford to lose money. No one is going to shop there who isn't already because they stop selling guns, and people aren't going to stop shopping there because they do still sell guns, or very few will anyway.

The point is they are taking away adverts for games like Borderlands 3 because they are worried about gun violence, but are happy to sell guns...bit weird, no?

 

[200sols]

Guns dont kill people, video games do. Walmart logic.

 

[StriderX]

You mean Trump Logic.

 

[Roar87]

The point is they are taking away adverts for games like Borderlands 3 because they are worried about gun violence, but are happy to sell guns...bit weird, no?

I mean guns themselves don't "glorify" violence, they're just a tool. Depicting people being murdered could be considered "glorifying" violence. I'm not saying I agree that video games or movies glorify violence or cause people to shoot people, but 99.99% of gun owners don't shoot anyone either.

Essentially, Trump is wrong for wanting to ban violence being depicted, you are wrong for wanting to ban guns from being sold. The focus should be on mental health.

 

[200sols]

You mean Trump Logic.

Both it seems.

 

[adolf hamster]

video game violence is really bad for you psychologically, no wonder all these people are going on murder sprees.

now i'm going to go back to my CSI vegas marathon

 

[wolfie138]

Well for NATO there's only really 7.62 as a common battlefield round isn't there? I've not read anything before about that round being designed to tumble. Any links?

if you google something like military bullet design etc you'll probably come up w/ some hits. there was a good docu on TV a good few years ago about it, due to the military benefits of wounding people rather than killing them. buggered if I can recall the name of the docu now, had a look at some of the duplex bullets too and some other interesting topics.
NATO used the 5.56 a lot too, not sure if they still do. a lot depends on which weapons forces adopt etc.

 

[VincentHanna]

I mean guns themselves don't "glorify" violence, they're just a tool. Depicting people being murdered could be considered "glorifying" violence. I'm not saying I agree that video games or movies glorify violence or cause people to shoot people, but 99.99% of gun owners don't shoot anyone either.

Essentially, Trump is wrong for wanting to ban violence being depicted, you are wrong for wanting to ban guns from being sold. The focus should be on mental health.

I don't want guns banned, i've never said that.

1) Walmart are a bit hypocritical here
2) i'm in favour of heavier restrictions on gun purchases. I don't believe anyone needs a semi-automatic rifle for instance.

I've shot guns before, and would be happy to do so again.

 

[Kutter]

Its funny how in some states you cant buy fireworks, but you can buy guns... When i lived in New Hampshire all i could hear all weekend was guns and fireworks going off.

 

[Minusorange]

As always Americans side stepping the obvious that their society is cancerous and instead trying to find any excuse to avoid addressing their cancerous society because doing so would destroy the illusion that their nation is great

 

[MadMossy]

I find it highly amusing that the media where very quick to plaster the history of the first shooter all over the press, because he was a right winger, yet when it came to the 2nd, didn't utter a word, because it turns out he was a left wing antifa extremist.

 

[neckbeardthethird]

I find it highly amusing that the media where very quick to plaster the history of the first shooter all over the press, because he was a right winger, yet when it came to the 2nd, didn't utter a word, because it turns out he was a left wing antifa extremist.

Perhaps engage your brain for one second and think about why that might be...

There is no evidence (unless I've missed something) that the guy with far-left views killed because of his ideology whereas the far-right guy created a textbook far-right manifesto explaining his motives. The two cases are not the same and it's pretty stupid to say stuff like 'why aren't there articles talking about how dangerous the far left is' when there is no proof that the second shooter went on a massacre because of his far-left views. The victims do not appear to be exclusively right-wingers, or Ice agents, Trump fans etc... in-fact one of them was his transgender brother. All signs point to it being completely random.

Both are/were nutjobs but so far it looks like only one attack was motivated by a political ideology.

Far-right attacks in the US also have a far larger body count than far-left attacks which seem to have peaked thus far with Milkshakes and ANTIFA thugs sucker-punching people, as bad as that is it's not really on the same level as several mass shootings, attempted bombings etc. The FBI considers domestic far-right terrorism a far bigger threat than far-left terrorism for these reasons.

edit: funny thing is the second shooters details are plastered all over the right wing press as they desperately try their whataboutism despite having no evidence available to backup their stance that it was influenced by Far left politics.

 

[Freakbro]

The two dont seem very equivalent at this stage though

I find it highly amusing that the media where very quick to plaster the history of the first shooter all over the press, because he was a right winger

Well, he did publish a manifesto that detailed his motivations quite clearly, which were politically and racially motivated with clear links to white nationalism

yet when it came to the 2nd, didn't utter a word, because it turns out he was a left wing antifa extremist.

But they dont seem to have found this guys motivation to have been born by any political, racial or antifa agenda Afaik, it seems he had an obsession with mass killings and expressed feelings towards killing people. Also, since his victims seem to be random bystanders, including his sister, it would point more to just a random killing spree than anything to do with him being a "left wing antifa extremist"

Edit : ^ too slow!

 

[200sols]

Come on, we all know if it was a right wing attcker they would be plastering his tweets all over the news and drawing conclusions from them, but as it’s a left wing attacker that’s OK because reasons....