Today's mass shooting in the US

Fair and I accept that one, but what are you trying to claim then by saying months of LW shootings? I shouldn't guess what you are trying to say so I wont, so spell it out.
Pretty obvious no? The recent shootings that have been linked in this thread have all had a common denominator, that common denominator being either left wing ideology - hi trans shooter (wonder where that manifesto went eh, the motives for this one will probably never see the light of day just like the vegas shooter) or democrat voters.
You constantly have a whinge at people linking stories from websites with information. Then come back and link a twitter profile, logic.
whinge? Not quite, what I do though is quite often laugh at folks that wouldn't accept the 'proof' the stories they link as factual if the shoe was on the other foot.
 
Last edited:
Pretty obvious no? The recent shootings that have been linked in this thread have all had a common denominator, that common denominator being either left wing ideology - hi trans shooter (wonder where that manifesto went eh, the motives for this one will probably never see the light of day just like the vegas shooter) or democrat voters.

whinge? Not quite, what I do though is quite often laugh at folks that wouldn't accept the 'proof' the stories they link as factual if the shoe was on the other foot.

Apart from the racist old man shooting a kid twice when he rang his doorbell right?
 
It really doesn't matter what political party the mass shooter associates with. It's always the same pattern in that society creates a bomb by usually by failing to provide any metal health treatment to someone struggling with life. Then you allow them to purchase high power weapons. Then something lights the fuse and a mass shooting happens

You can't blame a political party or ideology for creating a mass shooter but there's only one party currently blocking gun control and wanting to defund mental health care
 
and? Do you think that's new information or something?
C1ePGp3.jpeg

You immediately jumped to Hispanic gangbanger because he's Hispanic and has a tattoo and you found some post on Twitter to back up that viewpoint, the post you found was from an absolute loon with extreme views but it backed your viewpoint. Not every Hispanic person with tattoos is a gangbanger, in fact I think its safe to say the vast majority aren't. Maybe it will turn out he is, maybe he'll be a right wing extremist, maybe he was mentally ill, the army apparently discharged him for mental health reasons after all. However when a different viewpoint was offered you immediately get defensive/aggressive, which ever you prefer, because it challenged the narrative you had created, even implying a Washington Post journalist was making up a story. So far your narrative isn't shaping up. Lets wait and see what comes out in the next couple of days.
 
Pretty obvious no? The recent shootings that have been linked in this thread have all had a common denominator, that common denominator being either left wing ideology - hi trans shooter (wonder where that manifesto went eh, the motives for this one will probably never see the light of day just like the vegas shooter) or democrat voters.
No its not pretty obvious, otherwise I would not ask, duhhhhhh.
So you'll use recent shootings to justify your point but ignore previous shootings as they dont fit your context or narrative. Understood lad.
whinge? Not quite, what I do though is quite often laugh at folks that wouldn't accept the 'proof' the stories they link as factual if the shoe was on the other foot.
That is absolutely fine, but you dont really do that, appears you only have an appetite against the left. You never seem to condone or challenge RW.
Oh so you are too scared to clarify what you meant, thought so.
If I am scared, I would not of posted it in the first place.
You replied to it, what dont you get. You want me to re-link it again?
Well he needs to stick up for his crowd dont he.
 
No its not pretty obvious, otherwise I would not ask, duhhhhhh.
So you'll use recent shootings to justify your point but ignore previous shootings as they dont fit your context or narrative. Understood lad.
Yes the recent shootings since the last one that involved a rw nutter.
That is absolutely fine, but you dont really do that, appears you only have an appetite against the left. You never seem to condone or challenge RW.
Well I have done in the past quite a few times, in this thread in within the past few posts I've stated 'rw extremist nonsense' and 'rw nutter', but they'll probably count for nothing in your eyes right?
If I am scared, I would not of posted it in the first place.
You replied to it, what dont you get. You want me to re-link it again?
What crowd?
 
To absolutely no one's surprise


Despite

 
Last edited:
To absolutely no one's surprise

Slighty disingenuous article that as it's dated September last year so the comparison time period in question was June 2020 to June 2021, the height of covid.
 
I mean most would say he's a Neo-Nazi rather than call him right wing, does he have extensive views on fiscal conservatism? He doesn't seem very pro life either to be linked with being "right wing".
 
I mean most would say he's a Neo-Nazi rather than call him right wing, does he have extensive views on fiscal conservatism? He doesn't seem very pro life either to be linked with being "right wing".

Seriously? Are the Proud Boys fiscally conservative with their RWDS patches? Are the Oath Keepers or the Three Percenters?

Edit: Oh and I mention RWDS because he apparently was wearing that patch, its right wing death squad in case you didn't know.

Edit 2: and neo nazis are right wing Roar.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom