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.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.

I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.

He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

 Kanluwen wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
These kids may not watch much mainstream media but of course they know their actions will be extensively covered by it. That has to be part of the motivation. People like this are usually extremely isolated; they either have no one to express themselves to or they don't know how. This is an extremely effective way to get some attention, as horrible as that is.

Since we're talking about mental health, I can assume the shooter was white?

Correct. There has been a concerted effort by certain people on Twitter to point at his name as being Hispanic and trying to claim he was a DACA recipient though, because y'know...reasons.

I literally addressed this in my first post in the thread too.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.

I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.

He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

I stand corrected. However, that very fact would still make him "tainted" in the minds of most white nationalists, particualrly those of a supremacist bent.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.

I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.

He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

And more than that, if it truly isn't the case...what possible reason would a white nationalist militia have to lay claim to an attack like this?

Edit Note:
This is not meant to be promoting any conspiracy theories or whatever. Just reporting that a white nationalist militia claimed the shooter is "one of them". They talked about how he was involved in paramilitary drills with them.

Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.

From Feeder's article:

It doesn't sound like they are claiming responsibility, just that he was a part of their group. Whether that was in the past or currently I wasn't clear on.

(PARKLAND, Fla.) — The leader of a white nationalist militia says Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz was a member of his group and participated in paramilitary drills in Tallahassee.

Jordan Jereb told The Associated Press on Thursday that his group wants Florida to become its own white ethno-state. He said his group holds “spontaneous random demonstrations” and tries not to participate in the modern world.

Jereb said he didn’t know Cruz personally and that “he acted on his own behalf of what he just did and he’s solely responsible for what he just did.”

He also said he had “trouble with a girl” and he believed the timing of the attack, carried out on Valentine’s Day, wasn’t a coincidence.

Nineteen-year-old Cruz has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder in the shooting.

 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.

Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.

I don't take issue with associating him with a white nationalist group - I take issue with the notion that he received any kind of effective training.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Without wanting to get super political, a white nationalist militia in Tennessee has now claimed that the shooter "participated in paramilitary drills" with them.

I have my doubts about that claim since the kid was hispanic.

He was adopted by a Hispanic family, he himself is white

Just to clear up the demographics here. Hispanic is not a race - it is a geographic descriptor. It essentially means descending from the people of spain - much like the term European means you come from Europe. In other words - most Hispanics are white. Some are black.

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.

Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

So what you're saying is that this group needs to be crushed, completely, for even claiming it?

I can get behind this.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

Smaller white nationalist groups aren't targeting young adults for membership. They trend towards being far more insular whereby "familial" membership is common and they don't recruit outside of those who they feel prove themselves.

They're closer to criminal organizations and enterprises in that regard.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.

By that same vein, cease thinking of them as "white supremacist" groups. Many of them are nothing of the sort, making "allowances" for people as long as they share similar political beliefs.

You're more than welcome to try to talk down at me on this subject; but hate groups are not what you're making them out to be.

 kronk wrote:
From Feeder's article:

It doesn't sound like they are claiming responsibility, just that he was a part of their group. Whether that was in the past or currently I wasn't clear on.

(PARKLAND, Fla.) — The leader of a white nationalist militia says Florida school shooting suspect Nikolas Cruz was a member of his group and participated in paramilitary drills in Tallahassee.

Jordan Jereb told The Associated Press on Thursday that his group wants Florida to become its own white ethno-state. He said his group holds “spontaneous random demonstrations” and tries not to participate in the modern world.

Jereb said he didn’t know Cruz personally and that “he acted on his own behalf of what he just did and he’s solely responsible for what he just did.”

He also said he had “trouble with a girl” and he believed the timing of the attack, carried out on Valentine’s Day, wasn’t a coincidence.

Nineteen-year-old Cruz has been charged with 17 counts of premeditated murder in the shooting.

Didn't know him personally, but knew he had issues with a girl?

"Well I didn't know him personally, and he acted on his own"
*spits chewing tobacco juice*
"But I know he had girl problems, mmhmm"

No, this seems like the guy wanted 5 minutes on TV to spread his flavor of white supremacy, and figured this was the best route. If the kid had any sort of proper training, there would be more than 17 people dead. Most people think of white militias as fat dudes trying to be tacti-cool, but they do take their drills seriously.

He wouldn’t be the first to go shooting because of his problems with girls.

 Easy E wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.

Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"

What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.

I would consider hiding be safer option to trying to take video of the gunmen. If you can see gunmen enoiugh to take video reverse is also true and he's looking for somebody to shoot. Not good proposition for hopes of making out alive.

I wonder what they meant by "lone wolf activists" eh ..??

https://twitter.com/willsommer/status/964217365490790402

delightful people it would seem.

Still least you'll get that Tide Pod related legislation passed sharpish.

I would just like to point out that that graphic is lacking in coherency what the group itself is probably lacking in melanin.

Why would anyone post "clandestine" command structure on twitter? Obviously a crazy person. Also why use wordage like "cell" which is associated with terrorism? That's not a great way to draw in recruits..."hey you want to be a terrorist?".

 Kanluwen wrote:

 oldravenman3025 wrote:

 feeder wrote:
Cruz is his adopted father's name AFAIK.

Also, the leader of the group said he was a member.

White power and thinkin' real good tend to not go hand in hand.

Which still doesn't mean the kid was a member. This claim could be a case of some irl troll or a 1488 wannabe "militia" wanting attention. You see similar behavior from Islamic fundie groups and leftist "revolutionaries", claiming responsibility for crap they had nothing to do with for air time.

So what you're saying is that this group needs to be crushed, completely, for even claiming it?

I can get behind this.

Because smaller white nationalist groups tend to be riddled with old school (read: bitter, aging) white supremacists, his parentage (even if adopted) makes the kid a pariah in their minds.

Smaller white nationalist groups aren't targeting young adults for membership. They trend towards being far more insular whereby "familial" membership is common and they don't recruit outside of those who they feel prove themselves.

They're closer to criminal organizations and enterprises in that regard.

And don't underestimate the intelligence of these people or groups. That's a recipe for disaster.

By that same vein, cease thinking of them as "white supremacist" groups. Many of them are nothing of the sort, making "allowances" for people as long as they share similar political beliefs.

You're more than welcome to try to talk down at me on this subject; but hate groups are not what you're making them out to be.

Crushed? Not as long as they do nothing more than shoot off their mouths. When they start crossing over into more dangerous territory, then it's time of law enforcement to act.


Some are indeed run similarly to actual criminal enterprises, being money racketts.Others are havens for attention whores, made up of edgelords wanting their fifteen minutes of fame. Some are both. Sooner or later, the Feds will come down on them for running some sort of fraud charges or RICO violations. You saw that happen with gangs of crooks LARPing as "patriot groups" back in the 1990's, like The Freeman group in Montana.

There is a difference between "white supremacy" and "white seperatism", in general, despite the cross membership in groups, and both sharing some views in common. Most modern white nationalist groups are seperatists, or of an identitarian bent, not supremacists. And I've made no claim to the contrary. It's among modern white nationalist groups that you will see alliances (for want of a better term) with non-white civic nationalists and alt-rightists, since those groups are not generally racist in the traditional (i.e. dictionary definition, not in the post-modernist bull ) sense.

There are actual white supremacist groups calling themselves "separatists" and will have no truck with minorities (ethnic or racial) and whites associated with them. Not all of them died out back in the early 2000s when the big dogs like the Aryan Nations and Tom Metzger's White Aryan Resistance (WAR) fell out of vogue, or were bought down by lawsuits. They just tend to avoid the public limelight.

And I haven't made hate groups out to be anything other than what they actually are. I have a law enforcement and corrections background, and "Security Threat Groups" (STGs), as they are called in North Carolina LE parlance, were one area they focused on, especially after the proliferation of gangs in our State since the late 1980's, and the 9/11 attacks. Hate groups also fall into that category. Prisons were especially notorious for recruitment for STGs, with many memebers of these groups being locked up. The Klan and Nation of Islam especially liked recruiting cons and ex-cons at one time.

Cell is also associated with freedom fighters and the resistance, which is what these people think of themselves as.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.

The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.

 Frazzled wrote:

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:
Clearly "no guns for anyone" is off the table, but it seems like there must be a number of strategies or risk mitigation techniques between that and "guns for everyone" that are not being investigated or even discussed.

The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.

I'm pretty sure stuff like this always happened. However, with our current information technology and 24 hour news, we hear about each attack immediately, and the coverage probably pushes a few more over the edge from contemplation into action.

Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.

 skyth wrote:
Cell is also associated with freedom fighters and the resistance, which is what these people think of themselves as.

You are not wrong. The mentality is just
I imagine the FBI has these geniuses pretty well lit up.

 Frazzled wrote:
The same or similar firearms were freely available from the 1930s to the 1980s and this did not happen. We need to analyze what changed.The internet? Mass media? lack of fathers in the picture? drugs? mental health system changes? We need to identify what has occurred.

There were approximately 121 school shootings in the timeframe you describe.

I think the argument you want is "these were less common back in the day", because while they always happened the pace has significantly increased in the last... 10 years or so. There have been nearly as many shootings from 2000-2018 as there have been from 1900-2000.

Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.

 Luciferian wrote:
Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.

Then we should focus on that. I don't understand why there isn't a Manhatten Project about this going on. Everyone immediately dives into their pro/anti gun Purple Team Green Team mentality. No reason this can't be fixed. we stopped the Klan, went to the Moon, and tamed Chupacabra.

 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.

What does that mean, though? Where exactly is the problem (or problems) and how do we address them? It's a pretty damn complex issue. Why isn't there research being done on this topic aside from just a gun control vs. gun rights angle? If anyone knows of some I'd love to take a look at it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
Media infamy is unquestionably one of the motivating factors for doing this kind of thing. Throw into that higher depression and suicide rates among young males and so many other variables. A lot has changed, really.

Then we should focus on that. I don't understand why there isn't a Manhatten Project about this going on. Everyone immediately dives into their pro/anti gun Purple Team Green Team mentality. No reason this can't be fixed. we stopped the Klan, went to the Moon, and tamed Chupacabra.

Man, you ninja'd me. That's exactly what I was thinking.

 Luciferian wrote:
What does that mean, though? Where exactly is the problem (or problems) and how do we address them? It's a pretty damn complex issue. Why isn't there research being done on this topic aside from just a gun control vs. gun rights angle? If anyone knows of some I'd love to take a look at it.

We're not allowed to talk about it on this forum.

 Togusa wrote:
Until we get serious about Mental Health in the US, this will continue.

This is, to put it gently, a nonstarter.

If it were simply "mental health" issues, you'd have a lot more instances of these kinds of things worldwide--just without firearms.
And even if it were simply "mental health" issues, one would think that the person blaming "mental health" for it shouldn't have reversed legislation intended to keep firearms from the mentally ill.

That doesn't cover it, though. Sorry, I'm going to break the rules, but President Obama had the CDC conduct a study on gun violence toward the end of his administration. In any case, the CDC isn't the only entity that can do such research.

Still, there just isn't any research I know of about things aside from the gun politics part of it. What about the mental health part? It seems like no one on either side really cares about understanding or solving the problem aside from what's politically expedient.

tneva82 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
I just watched a few of the live feeds from students on social media during the attack. That is some horrifying stuff.

Yeah. And at the same time it makes you really wonder.

''Oh, there is this terrifying life and death situation going on! Better put it on Facebook!"

What would you propose they do while on lockdown with a gunman running around?

I am genuinely curious.

I would consider hiding be safer option to trying to take video of the gunmen. If you can see gunmen enoiugh to take video reverse is also true and he's looking for somebody to shoot. Not good proposition for hopes of making out alive.

None of the videos were of the shooter, and they were not trying to track him down to video. They were simply filming what was happening to them. They were in lock down in classrooms.