Mass murders

Posted by Casebier 1 year, 7 months ago to Politics
26 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Whether it's killing people in church, or James Holmes shooting up folks in a Colorado movie theater, or a sniper from a Las Vegas hotel window, or a Colorado high school mass shooting, or a gang shooting in a Chicago hood, the killers are all people who are losers. They have no self worth, no morals and don't care a whit for the sanctity of life. Obeying the laws of civilization, including those related to gun ownership or against wife and child beating, mean no more to them than traffic violations. And without exception, they always blame others for their own failures. They know they will never be famous, but also they see that mass murder will make them infamous, and remembered, if they take killing to the next level. In their twisted minds, it's their only shot at their "15 minutes of fame". Gun laws won't change them any more than making alcohol illegal changed people in prohibition. There are only two ways to change such twisted minds, with the first being impossible and the second being highly improbable. The first would require a total censorship prohibiting all reporting of these senseless acts, and the second would be a change in society that returns us to a level of morality not known since the 1950's and prior to anything goes liberalism.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  AJAshinoff 1 year, 7 months ago
    Shooters such as this, as well as a host other equally dangerous groups prevalent in society today, are the consequence of societal moral relativism. It will take a generation, perhaps more, to slowly turn the cancerous damage wrought by public schooling, a complicit media, and lackadaisical parents who selfishly haven't the desire to "teach their children well." Dem chikens dey comin home.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 7 months ago
    Agree, Casebier.

    If all young people today were trained in safe gun use and there were more sane people carrying guns every day the mass shootings would be greatly reduced.
    Elimination of gun laws will make people more safe. Existing (and additional) gun laws only increase the likelihood of more shootings, and the statist politicians know it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 1 year, 7 months ago
    You are correct in that the only real way to address the problem is proper education on natural rights and civic responsibilities (meaning those responsibilities regarding how we act toward others). The progressives have taken over the education of our children and so the only way to get it back is to replace the indoctrination with true education based on sound principles.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 1 year, 7 months ago
      Privately-funded education and home-schooling. With government in charge, it is almost hopeless to get any positive change. Which is why we never should have had public education in the first place. (And Thomas Jefferson made a great mistake in founding UVA).Education teaches thought processes--and that is something the government should definitely not be in charge of.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by zonoz 1 year, 7 months ago
        You incorrectly ASSUME that parents will both HAVE and TAKE the time and exert the massive effort necessary to home school their children. Not to mention the very real problem of what happens if the parents aren't capable of (smart enough) to teach their children. These days many parents don't even make the effort to discipline their kids much less spend 5 or 6 hours a day teaching them. The whole reason public education was introduced was to insure that every child got the same educational opportunities as the next. You think there's a problem with our education system now, turn back the clock 200 years or more to the days when only the rich ciuld afgird to pay for school for their children and the rest of the people worked themselves into an early grave just trying to support their family, never mind trying to home school them in anything but the family trade. In fact, we aren't too far off that right now for many in the US.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by LibertyBelle 1 year, 7 months ago
          At least then, profoundly ignorant illiterates were not going around wearing the label "educated". Also, I do not say that all parents would home-school their children, merely that it would be available as an option. Private schools, of different sorts, would exist. And those who believe enough in education would be free to contribute money to associations of their own to educate children of poor parents.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by ewv 1 year, 7 months ago
          Educating children is their parents' responsibility. No one "incorrectly ASSUMES" that they will all do it with the same competence any more than anything else they do in their lives. Nor did anyone but you "incorrectly ASSUME" that privately-funded education means home schooling one child at a time by parents who stay home to do it.

          The notion that "only the rich" educated their children 200 years ago is false. State controlled education was imposed for ideological motives following socialist utopians and statist philosophy in Europe. The first drive leading to state controlled education in this country was in New England in the early 1800s and was due to a religious battle between Unitarians and Catholics for control of education.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 1 year, 7 months ago
      Education in "Natural rights" and "civic responsibilities" is mostly irrelevant to the problem and at least in part not even correct. Natural rights as the founding of this country is a political concept pertaining to government, not disputes among individuals. Conservative "responsibilities" are duties to society. The segment of murderers who are ideologues already believe they are doing their duty and have no use for rights of the individual no matter what anyone teaches them in 'civics' classes. The was also true for their counterparts in American history such as union violence.

      All these murderers are operating on emotions without regard to the value of living a life of reason, which is the basis of individualism and its consequent respect for the rights of others. Indoctrination in 'civics' classes without regard to explaining the necessity of reason in human life for morality is hopeless, and when indoctrinating duty to society is in the wrong direction.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 1 year, 7 months ago
        The anti-Ayn Rand militant a-philosophical religious conservative 'downvoted' rational individualism again. Conservative slogans about inculcating duty and tradition do nothing to explain or stop irrational behavior of either typical criminals or ideologues committing crime on behalf of their politics.. The spreading of irrationality, which is not restricted to dramatic murders, is a philosophical crisis that shallow appeals to tradition and duty do not solve.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 1 year, 7 months ago
    I was out playing golf yesterday - playing golf with two kids. It was a beautiful day. When I heard the news of this shooting on my way in to work this morning I pictured the scene in that little church and imagined how it'd be different if somebody there had their CCW. In thinking about that and realizing how this could have been stopped I found myself exclaiming very loudly, "F*&K!"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by IndianaGary 1 year, 7 months ago
    The only thing that will stem the tide of random mass killing is a philosophical renaissance that properly decries altruism in all its forms. I don't see that happening any time soon. Perhaps in 1,000 years or so, if the human race survives. Humanity will more likely die of the mental illness we perpetually foist upon our progeny by inculcating religion and unreason and not teaching them to think; or rather, teaching them to not think, but to believe.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 1 year, 7 months ago
      The emphasis on reason in the life of the individual is more fundamental than the rejection of altruism, and that is illustrated by this rash of murder. Altruism means living for others, not sacrificing to anything whatsoever. A large segment of emotional murderers have no concern for morality of any kind, even false morality, and the religious-ideological murderers such as Muslims are dedicated to sacrifice to the supernatural, not altruist living for others on earth.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 1 year, 7 months ago
    More often than not if you look into the political affiliations of almost all of these mass murderers you will see that they are left leaning, liberal, socialist, communist or Marxists who support democrats in almost every election. Maybe we should start at the root of these evils!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Thoritsu 1 year, 7 months ago
    In my mind a ready solution is to publicly ridicule such perpetrators.
    “A sad pathetic human”; “Perhaps small moths were actually intimidated by this coward”; “Undortunately he wet himself, and demonstrated to the girls that he was ‘unarmed’!”

    This is what needs to be on the media for 10 min, followed by a public auction of the perpetrator’s body to be used as dog food, a weekend target practice or for leather goods in Bangladesh.

    No digging into the perp’s mind, endless discussions of sadness or fame.

    Guns are not the irresponsibility. Making the perpetrator into a famous martyr is irresponsible.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by chad 1 year, 7 months ago
    The only killers who are more dangerous are governments who when they are not afraid of their people kill by the hundreds of millions. Limiting the fame of small time killers might discourage some, part of the problem is that they are insane and there is no direct correlation between reality and what these kind of people do.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  allosaur 1 year, 7 months ago
    Me dino refuses to be made into a helpless victim. Because of such shooters, me dino carries a concealed 9mm pocket pistol everywhere and anywhere.
    I will even drive for over half an hour to the other side of Birmingham because I know where I can renew a driver's license without passing though a metal detector.
    The City of Hoover is also where my favorite indoor pistol range is located.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by zonoz 1 year, 7 months ago
      Reminds me of Kennesaw, GA the little town that 25 years ago passed a law that every head of household must own and maintain a firearm in response to Morton Grove, IL passing a law banning all firearms within city limits except for cops. Media predicted a return of the Wild West to Kennesaw and reduced crime in Morton Grove but the exact opposite occurred in both places and remains that way today even though Kennesaw has grown from a small town of only 2000+ population to over 20,000. Makes you wanna go hmmm.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 year, 7 months ago
    Some how, they became "Mindless" Humanoids; whether it be Project Monarch like programing, chased by the devil, psychotropic drugs or a severe influx of cosmic radiation, electron bombardments or those strange evil winds that make men mad as the ancients described, they sure as hell are not human at that moment and it makes no nevermind if they ever had a connection to a mind, a conscience or could perform rudimentary self introspections;.. at that moment they are dead to the world and creation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 year, 7 months ago
    I think the focus on mass murder, when it comes to making new rules, is mistaken. Most murders have only one or two victims. Even if new anti-gun-owner rules or gov't powers reduced mass murder, which I doubt, if it caused a slight increase in murders incidental to robbery, there could be a net-increase in gun violence. If the goal were to decrease gun violence, we should focus one- or two-victim crimes.

    If they can control the question, though, it's more important than the answers. "What are we going to do about mass shootings?" "What does anyone need with a...?"

    I question how effective a ban on reporting mass shootings would be. It depends on how many of the shooters are motivated by being nationally famous rather. It would probably stop a percentage of them. It's hard to say because mass shootings are so rare.

    It's obvious to me that pushing people to an earlier decade of morality makes things worse. Violence has decreased since the 1950s. Spousal abuse, violent fights among kids, abusive discipline of kids, and violence in policing were all worse. There were having violent protests for racial integration and equal rights, with the scared authorities often brutally oppressing people. The answer is to go forward along the trend of decreasing violence.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 year, 7 months ago
      The key here, as governmental statistics confirm, when ever guns are outlawed and confiscated, the violence goes up...makes no difference gun, knife or vehicle...the carnage racks up higher and higher...so at least initially, there must be "some" awareness on the part of these creatures of their chances for success.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 1 year, 7 months ago
        What you call success is completely different from what they who create restrictive gun laws call success. Your goal is less carnage. Their goal is bigger government and more centralized power and the carnage is merely minor "collateral damage" to the sheep.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 year, 7 months ago
          Sorry, I should of been more explicit...I was referring to the perpetrator, the terrorist and their awareness that there will be no guns so they can achieve their ends.

          But your point is valid in reference to the lawless makers too. Neither one are conscious beings, but must have some animal like awareness to do what they do.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo