Democrats condemn Trump, white nationalism after two mass shootings

[morrobay]

Ya-all can analyze this until the cows come home but to stop it from happening civil rights must be less important than public safety. That manifesto and should have put this person under immediate surveillance and his residence searched. So the liberals can blame themselves for their civil liberties that would not allow surveillance/searches in this kind of situation. Looks like this also applies to the Ohio shooter, the Florida shooter and how many more?? 

[simple1]

15 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Pinning the blame for El Paso on reckless rhetoric emanating from the present incumbent of the White House is a misguided, and ultimately fruitiless, exercise in political point-scoring.

 

The massacre, like others before it, is a ghastly and entirely predictable bi-product of the West’s ongoing irrational and destructive love affair with identity politics, a seed-bed for social division, polarisation and violence. 

 

As one of the few sane voices from the sidelines observes in a shrewd analysis of the latest terror attack: “This cynical rush to indict Trump as the inspirer-in-chief of mass murder might provide the cultural elite with a cheap political thrill.

 

"But it ignores the broader dynamics behind today’s racially paranoid violence. . .and the role the cultural elite itself may have played in nurturing a climate in which such despicable violence could emerge”. 

 

Read the full article here: 

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/08/05/the-armed-wing-of-identity-politics/

 

 

 

 

The author needs to get his spiel sorted. Give me a break - otherwise healthy body politic of modern America - LOL. The author's own words highlight trump's destructive messaging...

 

to the extent that Trump may have contributed to today’s climate, it was not by injecting some foreign kind of ‘fascism’ into the otherwise healthy body politic of modern America; rather, it was by also buying into the mainstream politics of identity, though he prefers to tap into a sense of white victimhood rather than black victimhood, Muslim victimhood, gay victimhood, etc.

Edited August 6, 2019 by metisdead
Oversize font reset to normal.

[chokrai]

21 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

It did, and it also spewed line after line of hate that is in complete alignment with Trump’s platform of race baiting.

 

When the President panders to white supremacists, vilifies immigrants and employs race baiting to cement his base, his words have consequences.

 

Lets not forget his response to the murder at Charlottesville, he’s a man who sees good people on both sides, when one side are neo-nazis.

 

Just because you keep repeating the same CNN liberal lies does not make them true. 

[chokrai]

16 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I also won't click on such filth but from the press excerpts I've read it reads pretty much the same as the current occupant of the white house's twitter feed or rally rhetoric. 

Charming.

[Chomper Higgot]

The specific characteristic of this attack, now accepted by Trump as a white supremacist attack, is that the victims were targeted because the killer believed them to be immigrants.

 

If the accusation that this attack was motivated by the political vilification, dehumanising and scapegoating of immigrants, attacks targeting immigrants will continue.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, chokrai said:

Facts are pesky little things are they not?

Selective unrepresentative facts are.

 

Let’s have the total number of mass shooters and see the real facts.

[RichardColeman]

I guess they'll be blaming Trump for all the mass shootings prior to him being president for the US apprentice not being as good as Lord Sugar's one !

[Longcut]

59 shot, 7 fatally in Chicago weekend shootings

Why is it, this doesn't make national news or world news? 

Oh, that's right. Maybe because this city is run by the Democrats and has some of the toughest gun laws in the country!

Too bad they can't blame Trump for this........

https://abc7chicago.com/59-shot-7-fatally-in-chicago-weekend-shootings/5443785/

 

 

By Cate Cauguiran, Michelle Gallardo and Leah Hope

Edited August 6, 2019 by Longcut

[Cryingdick]

Pelosi and the dems could introduce any legislation they want to, yet they don't. Why is that? I don't care if it would pass or fail I am just asking why they don't directly try to repeal the second ammendment or whatever they think is justified? 

[BobBKK]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The specific characteristic of this attack, now accepted by Trump as a white supremacist attack, is that the victims were targeted because the killer believed them to be immigrants.

 

If the accusation that this attack was motivated by the political vilification, dehumanising and scapegoating of immigrants, attacks targeting immigrants will continue.

 

 

ergo illegal immigrants should not be there and those that make political capital out of tragic deaths should stop and think - there were also mass shooting under Obama lest you forget.

 

[Cryingdick]

Just now, BobBKK said:

ergo illegal immigrants should not be there and those that make political capital out of tragic deaths should stop and think - there were also mass shooting under Obama lest you forget.

 

 

The Dayton shooter was a dem. Gunned his own sister down.

[geoffbezoz]

2 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

 

The Dayton shooter was a dem. Gunned his own sister down.

Just a couple of questions. a) where is the factual evidence that this shooter was a democrat ? and b) I understand the results of the autopsies have not been released so where is the factual evidence that he did indeed murder his Sister rather than what I took as unsubstantiated evidence to date  ?  Not condoning this nutter in anyway shape or form but I am a stickler for facts.

[Chomper Higgot]

18 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Pelosi and the dems could introduce any legislation they want to, yet they don't. Why is that? I don't care if it would pass or fail I am just asking why they don't directly try to repeal the second ammendment or whatever they think is justified? 

You do understand how an amendment comes about don’t you?

 

And you don’t seem to have been following the news on gun law proposals these past years.

 

 

[spidermike007]

18 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Yes officials are already openly talking about treating this case as DOMESTIC TERRORISM so it sounds like they are already convinced it was his manifesto. Remember, he's alive and reports are that he is talking. If that was his manifesto, it's fair to assume he probably confirmed that already. 

 

These are death penalty charges.

 

The government of Mexico is saying they might want to extradite him as he also murdered Mexican nationals. I'm assuming that's just political posturing. How many times in how many countries can he be executed?

 

The current occupant of the white house is scheduled to speak on the two mass shooting events today. It will be interesting if he mentions domestic terrorism. I think we can bet the house he won't say white nationalist terrorism. 

The way the death penalty is applied in the US needs to change. First of all, only 1499 people were removed from the planet, using the death penalty in the US, in the past 43 years. Not enough. And I say this as a moderate democrat. There are too many means of appeal, too many stays of execution. I say if the evidence is rock solid, and there are witnesses, and more than one person was killed by the weasel, and the crime is of a heinous nature, take him (or her) out within 48 hours, without the need of a trial. Just a small tribunal, that pronounces a sentence, and a cheap, $1000 execution. Done. Not even his mother is going to miss him. 

 

There are some lines you cross in this life, that essentially amounts to self-revocation of the right to breathe oxygen. 

[spidermike007]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You do understand how an amendment comes about don’t you?

 

And you don’t seem to have been following the news on gun law proposals these past years.

 

 

Nearly any proposal that has anything to do with more thorough background checks, has been completely rejected by the senate, who are deeply in the pocket of the NRA. (Never the Right thing for America). That is at least one place to start. Nothing wrong with being able to own a gun, if you choose to do so. But, not the nutters. 

[Longcut]

6 minutes ago, geoffbezoz said:

So in a US court of law, what has been broadcast by national news agencies is taken as a fact and able to be used in evidence against anysuspect is it ?   Sorry to be pedantic, but as I said previously I am a stickler for facts.

The fact that he did indeed kill his sister and her boyfriend? Yeah, I would say so.

[Cryingdick]

Also as probably the only person here who has bought a gun in the USA in the past 6 months on TV I know there are background checks already. When you go to buy a gun you are given a form. If you answer that you smoke weed for example you will be denied. Even though it may be legal in your state the gun laws are the feds. 

 

They ask about your medical history and if you have been hospitalized in the past and of course if you are a felon or a fugitive. Both political parties are acting like this doesn't exist already. 

 

The gun dealer sent the application to the FBI over the computer for review and the ATF for approval. It came back with a white piece of paper printed from the dealers computer. The paper simply had a couple details like my name and the word "pending".

 

So I went on my trip and left it at that. When I came home I went to visit the gun shop and there was a white paper with my name and it said "proceed." That's all it said. 

 

If Pelosi is serious and her squad is with her they should push for a full out ban because this background check game will never work. You can may be spot some crazies with the previous record but you will never catch those with access to firearms whose mentality may change later.

 

Go the tough on crime route to begin with and make any transport of a weapon illegally a very serious matter. You have the right to own and transport a weapon but during transport it must be unloaded and broke down. This is standard but make the penalty 20 years for any violation of gun laws period. This wouldn't infringe upon the second amendment. Add life in prison if a clip is used that carries more than 6 rounds. Any gun offense in a public area outside of your home or a licensed range becomes a very severe penalty. You could eliminate a lotto posers and wannabes. 

 

I think any crime committed using a gun should be considered an argument for life without parole. It isn't a cure however I feel that some of what I am saying could be implemented with out much difficulty until a broader solution can be ratified through the court systems. 

 

There is probably some sick bastard in El Paso that will open carry an AR 15 near a Walmart and post it to YouTube. Make this sort of senseless display illegal. Start with a ban on semi-autos by first banning guns that have that assault rifle look, they all do the same thing but the AK and AR15 are the fashionable gun of choice for psychotic idiots. A law that says firearms can not resemble or emulate a member of the military might have a better chance than an outright ban.

 

A complete gun ban is not in the cards anytime soon but you can put teeth in to what exists already. 

 

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Cryingdick

[Chomper Higgot]

Let’s start by closing the money laundering, foreign influence peddling NRA.

 

SDNY are on it.

[geoffbezoz]

10 minutes ago, Longcut said:

The fact that he did indeed kill his sister and her boyfriend? Yeah, I would say so.

I will have to ask again, where are these facts ? You do understand what a fact is do you ?

[mikebike]

12 minutes ago, Cryingdick said:

Also as probably the only person here who has bought a gun in the USA in the past 6 months on TV I know there are background checks already.

We know that too. Hint: gun shows...

[Cryingdick]

Just now, mikebike said:

We know that too. Hint: gun shows...

 

Was just walking people through the basic process to buy a gun in the USA. There seems to be a lot of bad info out there. The problem with background checks in my opinion is the person seems to be clean but is planning a crime. In the current system there will be no quantifiable measure of how somebody qualifies to purchase or be denied under the current constitutional framework.

 

This is why I believe a crack down on even the slightest infractions should be prosecuted vigorously. It's better than standing around naked in the mean time.

 

My point was also that I was scrutinized. The FBI and ATF checked me out. This is why I am saying that background checks will not work. They can't crosscheck a database with the medical community because it is confidential. The checks could work and should be beefed up. However that's going to get tied up in the judicial system for a long time. 

 

Make any penalty for a gun infraction much more severe right now is the best way to go. 

 

 

 

[Cryingdick]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Not just off topic, you even skipped to another country.

 

I was talking about gun control. That is the center of this topic. If it isn't it needs to be. A good start to controlling guns would  be to  not allow them to flow in or out of the country freely. 

Edited August 6, 2019 by Cryingdick

[Krataiboy]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

The author needs to get his spiel sorted. Give me a break - otherwise healthy body politic of modern America - LOL. The author's own words highlight trump's destructive messaging...

 

to the extent that Trump may have contributed to today’s climate, it was not by injecting some foreign kind of ‘fascism’ into the otherwise healthy body politic of modern America; rather, it was by also buying into the mainstream politics of identity, though he prefers to tap into a sense of white victimhood rather than black victimhood, Muslim victimhood, gay victimhood, etc.

It's what happens when identity politics becomes the only game in town. Everybody gets dragged into the game and we all lose in the end.

[tlandtday]

yeah except the shooter was an actual trump hater who had supported the democrats previously... 

[bristolboy]

5 minutes ago, tlandtday said:

yeah except the shooter was an actual trump hater who had supported the democrats previously... 

evidence?

[jonesthepost]

The yanks have had mass shootings for many years long before Trump. They never learn that as long as any one can go and buy what ever weapon they want it will go on and on. As long as  most  of the senators in the pocket of N.G.A wackos it will not change.   

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

15 hours ago, Krataiboy said:

Pinning the blame for El Paso on reckless rhetoric emanating from the present incumbent of the White House is a misguided, and ultimately fruitiless, exercise in political point-scoring.

 

No, it's the simple truth...

 

I can't say yes or no that the two specific shooters in these cases were directly motivated by Trump.

 

But I can definitely say, that Trump's inflammatory rhetoric and actions have clearly stoked the rise of racist and nationalist right-wing groups and activity.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

2 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

Pelosi and the dems could introduce any legislation they want to, yet they don't. Why is that? 

 

Obviously, you have no respect for facts or reality....

 

Quote

Democrats pressure Mitch McConnell to cancel Senate recess for gun control vote

 

A bipartisan gun bill passed the Democrat-controlled House in February.

....

The bill Schumer is referencing, H.R.8 or the Bipartisan Background Checks Act of 2019, would create new background check requirements for gun transfers between unlicensed individuals. It passed the Democrat-controlled House in February 240-190, with two members not voting.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/democrats-pressure-mitch-mcconnell-cancel-senate-recess-gun-control-vote-n1039086

 

Guess which party most of the 190 "no" votes in the House came from....when the bill was considered and ultimately passed?  The party headed by Massacre/Moscow Mitch and Tsar Trump.

 

Edited August 6, 2019 by TallGuyJohninBKK

[rabas]

47 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

About 60% of America is white-only, while current stats show white people carry out about 58% of shootings. But as a proportion of all races and shootings, white people far outstrip others.

 

The bottom line? What men can be very dangerous. Who has been responsible for most of the 20th centuries most heinous crimes? 

 

Statisticians world wide wept.

 

If 58% of all shootings were by white and 60% of the population is white, then proportionally fewer whites commit mass shootings, but you say far outstrips.  The statistica data you reference, here:

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/476456/mass-shootings-in-the-us-by-shooter-s-race/

 

Shows only 56% of shooters are white out of a 60-61% white population.

It also shows clearly that mass shootings are roughly distributed along ethnic lines.

 

Conclusion: It's not racial as you want it to be.

[Krataiboy]

6 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

No, it's the simple truth...

 

I can't say yes or no that the two specific shooters in these cases were directly motivated by Trump.

 

But I can definitely say, that Trump's inflammatory rhetoric and actions have clearly stoked the rise of racist and nationalist right-wing groups and activity.

If you can't beat 'em. . .