Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

mattyrm wrote:Fact is, if you want to blame someone, blame the mad fether that did all the killing.

No way, man. We have to start protecting him now. You know they might kill him, right??? INJUSTICE!

sigh :/

How are people supposed to mimic a film they haven't seen?

Perhaps it is a kind of "thought mimcry" in the course of which the person imagines what the film might be like, and then acts out the scenes they have made up.

Does the film actually contain a scene in which someone goes into a cinema and shoots at the audience?

I think the idea is that he was mimicking the Joker in DK not anyone in DKR.

Manchu wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Rimmy wrote: there are no "casualties" in this instance. they are all victims. there was no war in the streets of Aurora.

That's well said. A very good reminder of the insanity that plagues the whole culture, perceiving these murder victims like casualties in some war.

They died the same way that many died in Iraq and Afghanistan. Innocently and while minding their own business. It's not particularly different except now it's not so far removed from the American audience. They were technically casualties in several definitions of the word.

That's a scummy kind of equivocation.

Only if you like to distance yourself from deaths that occur to people who don't speak your language or aren't white. You didn't know those people, the only reason you feel anything at all is because it's just a smidge closer to home this time. Jihadin for all of his many, many, many faults has been to the other side of the world and has had mass killings performed in his vicinity before now. His reaction speaks to the kind of fatigue one has when they experience something horrifying with regularity. He's part of a more global tribe at this point while you're trying to make the bad that happened to yours unique or special.

possibly this scene from DK (towards the end)

ShumaGorath wrote:You didn't know those people, the only reason you feel anything at all is because it's just a smidge closer to home this time.

Well, I see you won't let anything that I actually have written in this thread get in the way of your larger agenda of making everything a political issue.

ShumaGorath wrote:Jihadin ... had mass killings performed in his vicinity before now.

Yeah, there's been nothing in the news ever before about this kind of public massacre happening in the United States, much less Virginia ... tell me more about the world, oh wise Shuma.

Jihadin for all of his many, many, many faults

I need to improve on my posting skills

Well, I see you won't let anything that I actually have written in this thread get in the way of your larger agenda of making everything a political issue.

It's not a political point to note that you react much more strongly and take much more offense when the event happens in the place that little flag by your picture represents. It's not a political point to note that someone who has been to more places and seen more atrocities has a less local and sympathetic worldview. It's basic observation.

Yeah, there's been nothing in the news ever before about this kind of public massacre happening in the United States, much less Virginia ... tell me more about the world, oh wise Shuma.

That's the point. It hasn't, but Virginia is a small place and shootings are a regularity in the U.S., just not ones at midnight movie releases. You reacted strongly to the accurate use of a term by someone with the background to use it because you don't like it when your own country is treated the way every other one is. That's political. The observation of your behavior is not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jihadin wrote:

Jihadin for all of his many, many, many faults

I need to improve on my posting skills

You need to post less things that make me want to smash my head into a wall.

ShumaGorath wrote:It's not a political point to note that you react much more strongly and take much more offense when the event happens in the place that little flag by your picture represents.

I don't recall shrugging off murders in other countries.

That's the point. It hasn't, but Virginia is a small place and shootings are a regularity in the U.S., just not ones at midnight movie releases.

What is this even supposed to mean? If shooting are such a regularity in a small place like Virginia, and your theory is that people become desensitized to violence by exposure, then why in the world would I be objecting to a soldier shrugging off murder in this case?

ShumaGorath wrote:You reacted strongly to the accurate use of a term by someone with the background to use it because you don't like it when your own country is treated the way every other one is.

I reacted against someone saying they are not bothered by children getting murdered. I find it especially alarming that a soldier would say this. Because soldiers are the exact people who need to be bothered by this -- you know, so they don't murder civilians. Your "points" here have nothing at all to do with anything that I have actually said.

Manchu: Soldiers shouldn't be casual about the murder of civilians.
ShumaGorath: Manchu only cares about Americans.

???

Enjoy your time on Mars. We'll have a medal ready when you get back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ShumaGorath wrote:You need to post less things that make me want to smash my head into a wall.

You ought to take that advice before you give it.

I don't recall shrugging off murders in other countries.

I don't recall you get hot under the collar about verbage either.

What is this even supposed to mean? If shooting are such a regularity in a small place like Virginia, and your theory is that people become desensitized to violence by exposure, then why in the world would I be objecting to a soldier shrugging off murder in this case?

Because I've never seen you take this kind of offense before now. Before it was suddenly nearby. Your reaction was seemingly personal.

I reacted against someone saying they are not bothered by children getting murdered. I find it especially alarming that a soldier would say this. Because soldiers are the exact people who need to be bothered by this -- you know, so they don't murder civilians. Your "points" here have nothing at all to do with anything that I have actually said.

And yours have nothing to do with his.

You ought to take that advice before you give it.

I hope you have a strong head.

ShumaGorath wrote:Because I've never seen you take this kind of offense before now. Before it was suddenly nearby. Your reaction was seemingly personal.

Dude seriously? You really think I'm the type to be okay with Iraqi kids getting murdered by anyone, much less American soldiers? After I posted that it's especially bad that a soldier would feel this way? I mean, there are people on Dakka like that -- usually, I'm arguing with them for 20+ pages about why voter ID laws are awful despite me not being old, poor, or black. I don't think I've ever posted anything to give the impression I only care about people like me. As for this instance, I've never seen a soldier post that he's not bothered by children getting murdered on Dakka, either. (Not that I believe it couldn't have happened before.)

And I'll add that I think this case shows us that civilization requires a death penalty.

How? Please outline the logic that makes this case sufficient stand alone evidence that civilization requires the death penalty.

Chongara wrote:Please outline the logic that makes this case sufficient stand alone evidence that civilization requires the death penalty.

In my view, there is no other civilized response to a person who murders just to murder.

Manchu wrote:

Chongara wrote:Please outline the logic that makes this case sufficient stand alone evidence that civilization requires the death penalty.

In my view, there is no other civilized response to a person who murders just to murder.

Yeah. I got that. This isn't an answer to my question, it's just a rephrasing of your previous statement.

Chongara wrote:This isn't an answer to my question, it's just a rephrasing of your previous statement.

Oh, you want me to explain to you what civilization is?

Manchu wrote:

Chongara wrote:This isn't an answer to my question, it's just a rephrasing of your previous statement.

Oh, you want me to explain to you what civilization is?

Please do! I love answers for unanswerables.

ShumaGorath wrote:Please do! I love answers for unanswerables.

Congratulations -- you have understood the crux of my rhetorical question! You win ... sadly nothing. Pride?

Manchu wrote:

Chongara wrote:This isn't an answer to my question, it's just a rephrasing of your previous statement.

Oh, you want me to explain to you what civilization is?

It couldn't hurt, as my current understanding of the concept isn't unseverable from the act of execution.

@Chongara: See above. But I will say this much: in my view, civilization is more of an ongoing act rather than a status we have already acheived. The action itself consists in utterly rejecting what is barbarous. (The subjectivity of these terms is not at issue because the act of civilization is proper only to a society underpinned by common values. People who do not share values cannot "do civilization," at least not together.)

sebster wrote:
Mike Huckabee blames 'sin'. Well, other people's sin. Not his own. Because he's a feth. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/exploringourmatrix/2012/07/mike-huckabee-and-americas-sin-problem.html

Best part? Pride is a deadly sin.

According to Prosperity Gospel, so is being poor!

Yes, I'm aware that it's more complicated than that.

Manchu wrote:

ShumaGorath wrote:Please do! I love answers for unanswerables.

Congratulations -- you have understood the crux of my rhetorical question! You win ... sadly nothing. Pride?

I'm worried, Dogma said that was a deadly sin. Am I in trouble?

ShumaGorath wrote:Am I in trouble?

That's a matter of conscience.

ShumaGorath wrote:I'm worried, Dogma said that was a deadly sin. Am I in trouble?

Best anima I brought. Nice Dogma...very nice.

I thought I was reading yesterday that the package just arrived in the mail room and was turned over to the police almost as soon as it got there.

So is there clarification about when it was send and when it arrived?

It supposedly hit the 12th (mail room). Since I never been to a university/college I assumed those mailrooms work like a unit mailroom. Also (forgot who mention it) the Psych doc was probaly out "vacation" (which it didn't occur to me when I assumed)

Easy E wrote:Totally agree Sebs. People are arguing about the symptoms of the true issue... (Editing for Clarity) Gunsa ar ethe symptom, and lack of decent mental health resources is the true cause.

The real problem is that most people don;t have access to any sor tof Pyshiatric help as existing low cost resources are flooded, and the other alternatives are far too expensive.

Then, there is the whole issue of identifying mental illness in the first place.

Well, to clarify, I think its more than just guns. A society steeped in violence and aggression plays a major part as well, it's just guns are, as you say, a symptom of that culture, and not just the culture itself. But addressing mental health is certainly a big part, and one that could see almost immediate results.

But unfortunately the battle lines are drawn, between the ban guns people and the 'here's a random bag of stupid pet interests that we're going to pretend have something to do with gun massacres'.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:Best part? Pride is a deadly sin.

Huckabee is so weird, because you listen to him and talks in that wonderful accent, and has that warm smile and you just kind of figure that you're listening to a nice guy. And then you read a transcript of what he just said and you realise that Huckabee is really just a complete feth.

And yeah, a big part of why he's a feth is that massive amount of pride he has in himself.

HIPA protects those with possible mental problems.

ShumaGorath wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Chongara wrote:This isn't an answer to my question, it's just a rephrasing of your previous statement.

Oh, you want me to explain to you what civilization is?

Please do! I love answers for unanswerables.

Pffeh, civilisation, unanswerable? I find you guilty of abandonning before even trying.

Also, why does anyone care about the inner workings of University mail? This factoid is only relevant insofar that it could, if things had happened differently, prevented the sad outcome of this tragedy. Billions of things could have. It's just that this is more apparent than all the other events. If people wants to find ways of preventing this type of things of happening, they won't do it by criticising the time it takes for Unis to deliver mail.

Like Frazz said, it's only relevant as far as an indicator of his state of mind. A psychologist I spoke to, who told me he had followed the first hearing, told me that the dude seemed to be suffering psychopathic dissociation during the hearing, which to him indicated that he was in control while he acted. The way he was explaining it to me seemed to suggest that he was now suffering the mental stress of having done something he can't possibly cope with. I'm not sure what that means in regards to something you've planned to extensively.