Waking up on Sunday to another Hate Shooting
- Thread starter NYShoreGuy
- Start date
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
You said you couldn't distinguish, I just wanted to establish that you can in fact distinguish the difference. With that confirmed, what is the number of fatalities for you to be able to distinguish as "terrorism"? Is it 5? Is it 10? is it 100?
I disagree. I think we should differentiate them for many reasons.
Thankfully I have the law on my side here, so not really even a debate.
Good lord, you are stubborn. HE didn't admit anything.
^ That part is not true. Get it?
It is the opinion of the investigators that it was intentional. A case they will now try to prove.
smh...couldn't distinguish the four different acts that were committed in the last two weeks. All horrific, people trying to murder other people, but you and merge are hung up on legal classification.
You're free to have your own feelings.
I have the laws on my side. I don't care to debate your feelings.
OK, great...you've succeeded at mincing words. Doesn't change my opinion of the horrific nature and how I feel about the four people that committed each of the crimes.
So the legal definition defines your feelings...got it.
lol.. mincing words?
You just either entirely made something up, or didn't understand what you read.
My guess is the latter, but you could at least just admit that.
Backwards. My feelings happen to agree with the fact that we treat them differently.
I can debate your feelings and offer examples of why we should treat them differently but given that this has already been litigated by our legal system, I don't really see the purpose of this one.
Wow...look who's stubborn. NYSG posts a series of articles trying to make a tragedy a political litmus test, which is disgraceful, which has now turned to you wanting to compare legal definition with feelings. You guys are so compassionate.
I corrected it for you...doesn't change my view, but you want to keep mincing words to make some kind of point.
Are you high? Seriously.
You asked the damn question. I replied. Replying to your dumb question constitutes obsession?
I agree with the way we treat these things legally. You don't.
I'm glad we have penalties for hate crimes and terrorism in excess of the penalties otherwise associated with those crimes.
When a Synagogue is or Mosque is targeted for example, it is an attack on an entire group sending a message that they are unwelcome. Their members and others around the community will feel the psychological distress of being attacked and the additional stress of wondering if they are next. That is more likely to occur with biased crime than non biased crime. Same thing with a targeted gay nightclub. A community was attacked.
So yes... It is my compassion and empathy that moves me towards my belief that our laws are designed properly
That said.. I do feel threads like this one are both started and responded to in poor taste.
Unfortunately, I took the bait.
Stop. None of this was terrorism. Terrorism is an attack on the at-large civilian population designed to cause fear and panic.
I have the same feelings if four people are murdered in their home or in a night club. I don't think about the potential legal charge when the murders happen. That's the point I was making above, but you just like to be argumentative and nitpick.
I think labeling something a "hate crime"; it's a waste of time, as the criminal probably gives a rats ass of how the crime is defined. It's all window dressing to make people feel good that somehow the government is doing something about it.
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
You tied a shooting where 5 people were killed to kids being groomed. I'd say you might have an unhealthy obsession.
You clearly didn’t read the idiotic post NYSG put out on Boebert, or you’re just dumb.
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
You're using Boebert to defend your buddies stupid groomer comment?
That's rich considering her husband exposed himself to underage kids.
Not really.
The Buffalo shooter was charged with domestic terrorism for shooting up a black supermarket. Not sure why you think this would not have a similar result.
The FBI specifically even mentions sexual orientation as one of their "other domestic terrorism threats"
A
anon_ezos2e9wn1ob0
Guest
Nope I didn't say that, nor would I have implied that you must then disagree with everything the law states... Because that would be a ridiculous thing to suggest. You do you though.
That's not what I said. You clearly were using the laws to justify your feelings. I just wanted to confirm if you do that every time or when it suits you to. You've answered my question.
My feelings are my feelings and they are mostly guided by empathy, compassion and logic.
Even if the law was different, my feelings would be the same.
I'm just glad the law recognizes the distinctions.
Wrong. Your buddy brought Boebert into the shooting. You reap what you sow.
Ok, but it is how the FBI defines it.
"Domestic terrorism: Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature."
This was a terrorist act. The Walmart shooting was a terrorist act. The EL Paso shooting was a terrorist act.
Not by that definition. What ideological goals were the perpetrators trying to achieve?
Killing gay, black and Hispanic people were the ideological goals in those cases.
Really doesn’t need to extend beyond that. If you’re planning to kill people based on some ideology - race, religion, politics etc.. then you would be consider to be plotting a terrorist attack if caught.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/11/22/us/colorado-suspect-background-aldrich-invs/index.html
What a f-d up family situation. Hate crime or result of family dysfunction and internal bullying. According to his lawyer, identified as nonbinary.
What a f-d up family situation. Hate crime or result of family dysfunction and internal bullying. According to his lawyer, identified as nonbinary.
But terrorism according to Merge!
Mental health, mental health, mental health. That's the problem, along with the breakdown of the traditional family unit over the last 20-30 years. Not guns, not "hate."
But terrorism according to Merge!
Or FBI... but ok...
Absolutely. Also, I think it should be clear that story paints the picture of someone who probably should not have access to guns though.
So why do politicians want to pass laws that restrict the rights of law-abiding gun owners or prospective gun owners? I'm all for keeping guns out of the hands of people with mental issues.
Depends which law you're referring to.
For example, H.R 8 on background checks for all gun sales passed the house this year. Won't get through the senate. Law abiding gun owners would argue as burdensome but a law like that would be necessary to help keep guns out of the hands of people with mental issues or others who would not be able to pass a background check.
Could be a facade.
www.fox21news.com
Alleged Club Q shooter identifying as non-binary
(COLORADO SPRINGS) — The suspect of the shooting at Club Q, an LGBTQ night club, on Saturday, Nov. 19, in Colorado Springs is now identifying as non-binary, according to court documents filed on Tu…
www.fox21news.com
Similar threads
