 |
Hello:
As mentioned in my recent thread, incivility isn't the problem. If this guy had walked up to his congresswoman and been UNCIVIL, we wouldn't be having this conversation... Nope. He SHOT her - with a GUN So, it's the talk of GUN PLAY that's the problem. What's so hard to understand?? GUN PLAY! I don't know how that got conflated with yelling at somebody... I LOVE incivility. I ain't pledging to be civil to nobody. How does everybody get so sidetracked??
excon
If we really ramped up the imflamatory rhetoric we may get to the place the country was in the Jeffersonian/Jacksonian era.
During the Jackson /JQ Adams contest the Adams faction was calling Jackson a murderer and a cannibal... and his wife a harlot.
The biggest difference between then and now is the incivility gets broadcast on the net . Back then the bloggers and MSM of the time ,the pamphletters ,just didn't reach huge audiences ,and these instances were contained and consigned to the historical record.
I also would like to point out again that this basturd had zero interest in debate civil and otherwise . He checked out of civil society and into his own reality .
He is really no different than the guy who tried to off Teddy Roosevelt, in a case that was eerily similar to Saturday.
1912 a psychotic saloonkeeper John Schrank,decided to take out Teddy Roosevelt. No one is sure when and if he ever had a strong interest in politics ,(he did object to TR going for a 3rd term) , but he did claim to be strongly influenced by a dream. He dreamed the ghost of William McKinley
Directed him to kill TR to avenge his assassination by anarchist Leon Czolgosz .
Schrank stalked TR until he found that he was to give a speech at the Milwaukee Auditorium and he attacked TR outside his hotel . He pointed a .38 pistol at his head and fired.
A bystander saw the gun and deflected Schrank's arm just as the trigger was pulled. Still the gun fired point blank at TR's heart.
Fortunately for Roosevelt in his jacket pocket was a 50 page speech double folded ,and his metal eye glass case . The bullet ripped through his clothing and the fortunate body armor and logged into TR's rib cage .
Roosevelt carried on and gave a 90 minute speech with the blood stain growing as he spoke. He could only whisper and said to the crowd... 'It takes more than that to kill a Bull Moose ' .
Rossevelt and Taft split the Republican vote and Woodrow Wilson became President.
Shrank was declared 'insane delusions, grandiose in character' and spent the rest of his life in an asylum.
Look we can all agree that this goose was insane, but there needs to be perspective in political debate as in all interaction. If I see inflammatory speech in political debate I know that that person has already lost the argument and have little to contribute.
Who can say if an outcome of inflammatory speech and attitudes as was displayed in this instance led to an unstable person acting on it, but what we can say for sure is that the availability of a weapon facilitated his action. There is just too much of the blow things up or blow him away attitude.
Then again... if someone there had been armed perhaps he could've been stopped sooner. One thing I have to wonder about is why wasn't there a police presence at a major political event ? This sheriff who continues to flap his gums hasn't answered that yet.
There was. One of the men who had sat on Loughner (Joseph Zamudio) was carrying a handgun. In an interview soon after the shooting, he said he had been on his way out of one of the nearby stores and was headed toward his car when he caught sight of the mêlée. He reached into his pocket and pulled back the safety of his handgun just in case he had to use it. He said he was ready to shoot and kill. He was able to help hold Loughner and keep him from using his gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Very much what if thinking and being an armchair judge. This was hardly a major political event but it may have warranted a police presence. What you have to decide is are people naturally belligerent or naturally docile. This was an after the election meeting probably no need to think it was anything specialQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
So whatever the truth about this dude is, this tragedy is still the fault of those bitter gun totin' religion-clinging right-wingers. Is that what you're saying?
I blame John Kerry, he shouldn't have been campaigning for president with a shotgun in his hands.
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/512...6BF04B24B4128C
Hello again, Steve:
If you've followed me here, you'd KNOW that I'm not placing blame. I don't make a direct link. I'm only SUGGESTING that some nut MIGHT take advantage of the permission he receives from SOME politicians to use guns...
I'm only suggesting that GUN talk be stifled. Here in this great country of ours, you can think Sharron Angle was (and IS) your ideal politician. You are allowed to think it's cool to talk about shooting your opponents.
That's fine. I'm used to you being wrong. If John Kerry did an add with a shotgun, he's wrong too.
excon
Ok then, it was all that war imagery the left uses...
How to win the war on global warming
Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty
The Republican War On Science
War On Greed
Rupert Murdoch's War On Journalism
Or if you really want to get serious about how nonsensical the discussion has gotten, a visit to Zombietime should put it in perspective.
I detailed in the Jesse Ventura op that this had nothing to do with the political debate (unless you think things like 'truthers' ,'world wide banker's conspiracies ',and listening to the voices in your head, are part of the political discourse )
Hello again, Steve:
I see that you, like your political brethren, can't distinguish between mean and ugly political rhetoric, and talk of GUN PLAY... Furthermore, you don't even appear to be aware that I'm MAKING that distinction... Dude.
Sharron Angle suggested that if people don't like the way an election turns out, they can use their GUNS. YOU think my complaining about that is nonsensical, even though some nut just shot a politician. Dude.
Like I said, I'm used to you being wrong... I haven't changed my mind.
excon
Charles Manson was inspired by Beatles music , Hinkley by an obsession with Jodi Foster , Chapman by passages of 'Catcher in the Rye' ,the Colombine killers by Marilyn Manson and the Matrix .
This clown was inspired by the internet documentary 'Zeitgeist' (a net movie that more than one expert here recommended ) . Would it be fair for me to point out that those who recommended it to me were complicit in feeding thoughts of homicide ? Of course not.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
THIS is NOT about him... I don't know what inspired him, and frankly, you don't either.. He's a NUT... Maybe a grasshopper inspired him... I don't CARE. THIS POST is about POLITICIANS who say GUN PLAY is an option... It IS a possibility that Sharron Angle inspired him, isn't is??
Deflect all you will.. I'm not going to let you... This is about POLITICIANS who think GUN PLAY is a viable alternative to elections... It's not about WAR.. It's not about yelling at people.. It's not about fighting... It's about SHOOTING people!! I don't know what's so hard to get.
excon
It's about politicians you don't like making marshall references which are common metaphors to the political contest.
Who was more responsible for political violence in this country in the last 50 years ? Tea Party types or left wingers ? I remember the late 60s very well.
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Yeah, that's what you guys say. You're wrong. It's about politicians giving PERMISSION to shoot the candidate they don't like... You SAY it's common, but it ISN'T. SAYING that if you don't like the results of an election, you can SHOOT your opponent ISN'T very common where I come from.
It's OK.. I suppose it's winger denial that prevents you from understanding, that when a politician calls for people to USE their "Second Amendment remedies", it actually means it's OK to SHOOT people.
Now, you'll talk about war metaphors, and fighting metaphors, and marshal reference metaphors... But, that stuff doesn't give PERMISSION for a disgruntled citizen to SHOOT people. Sharron Angle did just that.
I don't know what so hard to understand.
excon
So Sharon Angle inspired the shooting ? No you'll say it wasn't her or about him even as you pull the linkage out of thin air with no evidence. Maybe that's the civility and rhetoric problem the President is referring to ;the over the top speculations over causation . I honestly don't know why you are using her as an example over W Va Senator Manchin who actually fired a rifle in an ad . Do I think he inspired a shooting... no. And no reasonable argument could be made to create a linkage either .
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Sure, him too. Honestly, I'm using Sharron Angle because she didn't mess around with what she was saying. She was clear, concise, and straightforward. You got to applaud her for that.
You're also right... I don't need a reasonable argument to LINK the events, because I'm NOT LINKING them. It's ANOTHER deflection...
But, I wonder... Are you saying that unless and until, we can actually FIND the link in this deranged gunman's brain, then it's COOL to call for your opponents assassination?? I think you MIGHT be saying that... Bummer.
excon
Ex, just because I don't play along doesn't mean I don't get the distinction you're trying to make. In fact, I just find it irrelevant.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
No, I just know that most Americans are not nuts.Quote:
Sharron Angle suggested that if people don't like the way an election turns out, they can use their GUNS. YOU think my complaining about that is nonsensical, even though some nut just shot a politician. Dude.
I have a gun, more than one, I talk about guns, read articles about guns. My dad has many guns, he carried before it was legal, he taught me and my 3 brothers all how to shoot. We'd go to Grandma's house and as young as 8 he would let me strap on a .22 and just go shoot tin cans or whatever else we could make a target of. I even played with GI Joe and little army men. I'm playing my 4th version of Halo, and am waiting delivery on a Call of Duty game. I've played several other first person shooters as well. Heck, I've watched John Wayne and Clint Eastwood movies... I've never shot anyone and as far as I know no one has been driven to murder because of my example.Quote:
Like I said, I'm used to you being wrong... I haven't changed my mind.
My mom and dad were held hostage and robbed in their own home and he could have killed the man, but he stayed calm and evaluated the situation and just knew the guy wasn't out to hurt anyone. Everyone got out alive.
All this rot about gun talk AND the political rhetoric from the right is NONSENSE, we are not stirring up the masses to violence. This guy had a beef with Giffords since 2007, long before the Tea Party and while Bush was president. He had a long history of bizarre behavior documented by the Pima Community College he attended. Like the Ft Hood shooter the signals were there but no one did anything. And yet, within minutes of this tragedy knees jerked all over the country, and suddenly I am implicated in a murder.
Me? Yes me. I voted for Palin and McCain, I own guns, I'm a conservative, I've encouraged the people to "take back" their country, and you know what, implicating me in a mass shooting pi$$es me off. Just like I've been unfairly and unjustifiable demonized as a racist bigot, which also pi$$es me off.
The left and their accomplices in the media have abandoned reason, justice, fairness and facts and targeted millions of Americans just going about their lives as being dangers to society and that is far more irresponsible than whatever gun talk that has your panties in a wad. In my opinion, you'd think all these people calling us bitter, gun totin', religion-clinging murderers would stop pushing our buttons.
Hello again, Steve:Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
In your next lifetime... In THIS one, you got ME to deal with.
excon
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:42 PM. |