Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Potential mass shootings thwarted


Dantankerous

Recommended Posts

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s been charged with telecommunications harassment and aggravated menacing after authorities say he made an ominous post on his Instagram account, which they say contained anti-semitic material.”

Those are current laws, not a new red flag law. Sixgun has it right, so common it is usually not “newsworthy” for the media.

 

Sedalia Dave, I agree.  Stop making them famous, assign them a number, then let their name and face go into oblivion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sixgun Sheridan said:

Arrests like this happen all the time. These only became front-page news because the news media is doing everything they can to fan the flames.

It’s not personal!

 

I have seen a number of statements in posts here in the Saloon decrying the anti gun bias of the media. While I agree that there is that bias in many news reports, I believe that what is being promoted is not so much a moral agenda as TV ratings. What sells is excitement, pathos and moral outrage. This sells advertising time and the corporate managers are interested in money not morality.

 

Quote from The Godfather:

“It’s not personal, it’s strictly business.”

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, If the evidence is overwhelming I think there should be a news article or a broadcast that an armed idiot has been apprehended. There should be a quick trial and off to Guantanamo he or she goes with no mention of their name or anything identifying them. Two or three of these and watch the craziness dwindle away.

These idiots crave attention. They can continue to crave attention in a hot cell somewhere.

They are copycats. They should get special treatment for that. Like cold firehose showers at random for a period of time.

 

Harsh? Yes. It is what is needed. In my not so humble opinion. 

 

As as I said at the start “If the evidence is overwhelming!” Just a little reminder there for clarity. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Pat Riot, SASS #13748 said:

Well, If the evidence is overwhelming I think there should be a news article or a broadcast that an armed idiot has been apprehended. There should be a quick trial and off to Guantanamo he or she goes with no mention of their name or anything identifying them. Two or three of these and watch the craziness dwindle away.

These idiots crave attention. They can continue to crave attention in a hot cell somewhere.

They are copycats. They should get special treatment for that. Like cold firehose showers at random for a period of time.

 

Harsh? Yes. It is what is needed. In my not so humble opinion. 

 

As as I said at the start “If the evidence is overwhelming!” Just a little reminder there for clarity. ;)

 

My apologies, we crossed a line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know that as law abiding gun owners we shouldn't be in such a hurry to take the state's word on these arrests.  Nor should we be anxious to see these people harmed.  They are innocent until proven guilty and maybe they are sick but sick people should get treatment not torture.  Shame on you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, J. Mark Flint #31954 LIFE said:

You know that as law abiding gun owners we shouldn't be in such a hurry to take the state's word on these arrests.  Nor should we be anxious to see these people harmed.  They are innocent until proven guilty and maybe they are sick but sick people should get treatment not torture.  Shame on you

 

Did you miss the part about "Overwhelming evidence"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overwhelming evidence or not

 

intent to commit a crime is not the commission of a crime, there has to be a act in furtherance of the intent, called an Overt Act- you want the precedent to be owning a semi automatic firearm and 400 rounds can be the Overt Act?  

 

And conviction or otherwise there is nothing funny about  Pat Riot crossed a line when he advocated

"They should get special treatment for that. Like cold firehose showers at random for a period of time.

 

Harsh? Yes. It is what is needed. In my not so humble opinion."  and you piled on with "Agreed. Add weekly cold water enemas to keep them cleaned out..." Which I took to be a poor attempt at humor.

 

What the two of you have done is advocate that we torture prisoners.  I'm better than that and I think most of us here are.  I am offended and embarrassed at the idea of being associated with these statements

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, J. Mark Flint #31954 LIFE said:

Overwhelming evidence or not

 

intent to commit a crime is not the commission of a crime, there has to be a act in furtherance of the intent, called an Overt Act- you want the precedent to be owning a semi automatic firearm and 400 rounds can be the Overt Act?  

 

And conviction or otherwise there is nothing funny about  Pat Riot crossed a line when he advocated

"They should get special treatment for that. Like cold firehose showers at random for a period of time.

 

Harsh? Yes. It is what is needed. In my not so humble opinion."  and you piled on with "Agreed. Add weekly cold water enemas to keep them cleaned out..." Which I took to be a poor attempt at humor.

 

What the two of you have done is advocate that we torture prisoners.  I'm better than that and I think most of us here are.  I am offended and embarrassed at the idea of being associated with these statements

 

 

You are correct, my apologies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, J. Mark Flint #31954 LIFE said:

You know that as law abiding gun owners we shouldn't be in such a hurry to take the state's word on these arrests.  Nor should we be anxious to see these people harmed.  They are innocent until proven guilty and maybe they are sick but sick people should get treatment not torture.  Shame on you

No, not shame on me. Oh, there is a sickness but it’s not a sickness that needs molly-coddling from lawyers and social engineers.  No, I believe it’s time to quit playing the games in this country that obviously haven’t worked up to this point.

I disagree with you. You can be embarrassed. I really don’t care what you think about it. My statement has nothing to do with you or your feelings. Do not drag me into your drama. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both.

 

As US citizens we are entitled to a fair trial by our peers. We are innocent until proven guilty. That should never be tampered with and is a foundational block of our civilization.

 

But if convicted? Prison should not be 3 squares a day and craft classes. It should be hard labor. If you commit murder you should be hung by the neck until dead. And not 7 years of appeals either.... The execution should be public as well. Barbaric? Maybe. But it may teach some that the stove is indeed hot. And that there are REAL consequences to our actions.

 

Back to red flag laws.... I’m not for them. BUT! I don’t think that planning a domestic terrorism attack is the same thing as calling in the cranky old man down the street because he has some firearms, and you don’t like him.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Dantankerous said:

In spite of many in the media's tromping in step to say these are examples of why 'Red Flag' laws work -- these WEREN'T 'Red Flag -- for your own good' confiscations.

 

In each of the cases cited, the person had allegedly committed a crime that existed -- mostly some form of communicating a threat, backed up with having or acquiring the means to carry out that threat.

 

The reasonableness of prosecuting a threat vis-a-vis 1st Amendment protections is a different discussion -- the point here is, while the anti-Constitutionalists might want to use them as examples of successful Red Flag laws, these potential mass shootings were not stopped by Red Flag laws. They were stopped by people alerting law enforcement to a situation, appropriate investigation, and action taken through existing laws. Constitutional rights were protected, instead of a citizen having to go to court to prove he or she was worthy to have a right reinstated that had been taken away without the opportunity to face the accuser.

 

On another point, I believe justice is served less by the barbarity of the punishment than by the certainty of it. I could be wrong, bu it seems the media has made a slight shift in its coverage of these shootings, to focus a little less on the shooter and more on the victims and noteworthy heroism that came forward during the event. Anonymity in death is perhaps the greatest punishment mass shooters could face.

 

After 9-11, the U.S. became much more unified. Flags were flown, people talked to neighbors -- it was all part of proving we would rise above the attack.

 

Now, each attack seems to be planned to wedge into a fault line; they seem intent to exploit a divisive issue to leverage more publicity from an already raucous debate and drive what should be rational discussion even further into the realm of bitter intransigence.

 

But that's just my take on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.