Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 29 minutes ago, karaddin said: The wording of what they've said give off the strong impression she's likely to have been the first victim. The last statement could be read as having found a body they suspect is her but haven't been able to identify yet. Or it could be something completely different, they've being conservative with the info they're releasing. There is a huge amount of misinformation flying around twitter with apparently people trying to manipulate it for their own gain. The Russian bot/troll network in particular got going on it straight away. Not suggesting any connection to the actual shooting, just that you have to be very wary of false information flying around. That may be the case but I sincerely hope you are incorrect. I'd like to know what the hell what happening here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatCoward Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 You are getting very excited and not reading what was written. It is possible they stated lone wolf because at first there was reports of multiple incidents. This would be to calm the situation down as panic can cause untold carnage and increase casualties. That being said the police may be being institutionally racist. At this stage we don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, BigFatCoward said: You are getting very excited and not reading what was written. It is possible they stated lone wolf because at first there was reports of multiple incidents. This would be to calm the situation down as panic can cause untold carnage and increase casualties. That being said the police may be being institutionally racist. At this stage we don't know. Of course I'm getting excited. I'm sick of this shit. It's very simple to say "there are no more shooters" or "there was only a single shooter" instead of going down the lone wolf, crazed individual route. It's a narrative that is harmful to the public. It's a narrative that helps create things like useless and racist travel bans while defunding the policing of white terrorist groups and anti-domestic violence initiatives. The lone wolf crazed individual narrative romanticizes it, makes it seem as though these incidences are extremely isolated and that no other work is needed to prevent them in the future. Again, it's harmful and unhelpful to the public. 3 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: No need to go and read all of the below links. They are just the first five or six headlines I could copy and paste from google, describing so called "lone wolf" attacks conducted by "non white" men. Lone wolf attack has a specific meaning. It mostly means there isn't a coordinated attack by multiple individuals, or altenatively that the attacker is not actively supported by a larger network. Whether they called it too soon only time will tell. But the point of such an announcement fairly early on is largely to reduce public panic and fear of more attacks. Not to try and describe the race of the attacker. http://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2017/september/isis-calls-for-lone-wolf-attacks-on-hurricane-victims-at-relief-shelters http://edmontonjournal.com/news/crime/lone-wolf-terror-suspects-usually-tell-others-about-their-plans-expert-says https://aawsat.com/english/home/article/1040111/‘lone-wolf’-phenomenon-started-west-adopted-qaeda-isis http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/edmonton-terrorist-attack http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4940156/ISIS-video-called-lone-wolf-attack-Las-Vegas.html Did you not want me to read those links because then I would see they were completely bogus for this particular topic? I mean, did you even read them? The first is about the Daesh calling for lone wolf terrorist attacks, not an actual attack, two links are to the same terrorist attack in Canada where the words 'terror' are clearly used (though, again, it's Canada not the US where there are different issues about race and the media at play), another article specifically about how the "lone wolf" thing is a western phenomenon, and finally an article about today's white male shooter where it wonders if a video released in may has any relation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongRider Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Las Vegas now has the most killed in mass shooting in the USA. Police used explosives to break into the hotel room where the shooter was. Will the Orange Thing call the shooter a 'fine person'? There is a Trump tower nearby. Oh, and this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 16 minutes ago, polishgenius said: I didn't deny that racism plays a part. I literally said it does in my first reply to you (I mean, maybe I need to spell out that YEAH THAT'S RACIST when I say I agree that they're too quick to jump one way and not another but I think most people got it?). And I'd also suggest that you have far better things to be doing than arguing with me if you have the information you claim you have. Why are you telling us and not the police? Your first post about this admitted much reluctance in identifying institutionalized racism in going straight to the lone wolf narrative. So yeah, maybe you should have spelled that there might be racism if that's what you're now claiming you really meant. As for what better things I could be doing, are you joking? I could be saying the same about you but I don't give a fuck what anyone else is doing with their time. Unless it's harmful to the public, like bigotry or terrorism. Just now, Let's Get Kraken said: I think the point is that whether it turns out to be a crazy loner or not, labeling it thus with little more than the shooter's race to go off of is calling it too soon. Yup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polishgenius Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said: Your first post about this admitted much reluctance in identifying institutionalized racism in going straight to the lone wolf narrative. So yeah, maybe you should have spelled that there might be racism if that's what you're now claiming you really meant. My first post admitted no such thing. All it said was 'can we wait till we know shit before we start shouting shit'. Quote As for what better things I could be doing, are you joking? I could be saying the same about you but I don't give a fuck what anyone else is doing with their time. Unless it's harmful to the public, like bigotry or terrorism. I don't give a fuck what you're doing with your time except you seem to have insider knowledge of this attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, polishgenius said: My first post admitted no such thing. All it said was 'can we wait till we know shit before we start shouting shit'. I don't give a fuck what you're doing with your time except you seem to have insider knowledge of this attack. This is your first reply where apparently people were 'complaining' about racist motives for it being called a crazed lone wolf attack. There is nothing here where you acknowledge that this narrative is a racist one. 1 hour ago, polishgenius said: Can we not wait until we know what his motives were and if he had any before we start complaining that there's racist motives for it not being labelled terrorism? As for insider information? The fact that dozens have been murdered and that the media have begin the lone wolf narrative is not insider. ITS WHAT WE ARE CURRENTLY DISCUSSING. The only 'insider' info I have is the name of at least one dead, but that's only 'insider' because there is a method the media and police use before they start to release names of victims to the public and that 'insider' information is completely irrelevant to this discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mormont Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 [mod] Chill out, please, folks. Nothing is achieved by snapping at each other on this thread. [/mod] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said: Las Vegas now has the most killed in mass shooting in the USA. Police used explosives to break into the hotel room where the shooter was. Will the Orange Thing call the shooter a 'fine person'? There is a Trump tower nearby. Oh, and this. Omg. This quote from the article: But Republicans say the provision, called the Hearing Protection Act, doesn’t really silence the sound of gunfire, only diminishes it enough to shield hunters and recreational shooters from hearing damage. Because I guess having a robust ear safety market isn't an idea that crossed any of their minds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonnot OG Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 47 minutes ago, Nasty LongRider said: Las Vegas now has the most killed in mass shooting in the USA. Police used explosives to break into the hotel room where the shooter was. Will the Orange Thing call the shooter a 'fine person'? There is a Trump tower nearby. Oh, and this. I was just coming here to post about this that. Imagine how's much worse the carnage would be if Jen had a suppressor since no one would be able to identify the gun shots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 And this event will not impact their vote at all. Lot of thoughts and prayers though. Put thoughts and prayers in one hand and shit in the other. You will have two hands full of shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 I'm not really sure I understand the crossing state lines part of this. How do they get around individual state laws? How does the party of 'states rights' sell this to their base? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aceluby Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 11 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said: I'm not really sure I understand the crossing state lines part of this. How do they get around individual state laws? How does the party of 'states rights' sell this to their base? Because they've never been 'small government' or 'states rights', government always seems to grow faster under GOP control. It's always been a bunch of dog whistling bull shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Pepper Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 What sort of precedent would this set for everything? If I hold a driver's license in Colorado and smoking weed is legal there, would I be able to carry my weed and smoke it in Alabama? What other laws and privileges would be potentially open to crossing state lines? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morpheus Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Nothing like a massacre to push gun stocks https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/02/gun-stocks-rise-after-deadly-las-vegas-shooting.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Which Tyler Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Source: BBC live news about 2 minutes ago - stressing Reuters as the source, and that they've not been able to verify ETA: Looks like the original claim was untrue (currently, according to the FBI); so I'll do my little bit to starve it of oxygen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Free Northman Reborn Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 Not sure if this goes in the politics thread or in the Vegas shooting thread. CNN quotes the police as saying this: Asked if police were classifying this shooting as a terror attack, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said, "We have to establish what his motivation was first." “There’s motivating factors associated with terrorism other than a distraught person just intending to cause mass casualties," he said. "Before we label with that, it'll be a matter of process." Anyone care to decipher what that is supposed to mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiDisaster Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Not sure if this goes in the politics thread or in the Vegas shooting thread. CNN quotes the police as saying this: Asked if police were classifying this shooting as a terror attack, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said, "We have to establish what his motivation was first." “There’s motivating factors associated with terrorism other than a distraught person just intending to cause mass casualties," he said. "Before we label with that, it'll be a matter of process." Anyone care to decipher what that is supposed to mean? Not much to "decipher" here. Just the usual bullshit. "He's a presumably non-Muslim white man, therefore it's not terrorism." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 10 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Not sure if this goes in the politics thread or in the Vegas shooting thread. CNN quotes the police as saying this: Asked if police were classifying this shooting as a terror attack, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said, "We have to establish what his motivation was first." “There’s motivating factors associated with terrorism other than a distraught person just intending to cause mass casualties," he said. "Before we label with that, it'll be a matter of process." Anyone care to decipher what that is supposed to mean? It translates into "We have no idea why this happened." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The BlackBear Posted October 2, 2017 Share Posted October 2, 2017 8 minutes ago, Free Northman Reborn said: Not sure if this goes in the politics thread or in the Vegas shooting thread. CNN quotes the police as saying this: Asked if police were classifying this shooting as a terror attack, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo said, "We have to establish what his motivation was first." “There’s motivating factors associated with terrorism other than a distraught person just intending to cause mass casualties," he said. "Before we label with that, it'll be a matter of process." Anyone care to decipher what that is supposed to mean? The FBI definititon of Terrorism: Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of political or social objectives. If this attack was simply to hurt people, it's not a terror attack in that sense. If he had a ideology he wanted to further with this attack it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.