Spork Boards

Granberry's Parlor

tomierna's Avatar Picture tomierna (Admin) – December 07, 2007 09:46PM Reply Quote
Politics. Don Granberry on the old Spork Boards was quite fond of talking about them, and here we continue on in that fine tradition.

porruka (Admin) – October 02, 2017 07:24AM Reply Quote
Failure is pre-greatness.
Quote
John Willoughby
Pedantic: A terrorist uses violence against civilians to effect political change. Until we know if this orgy of violence was politically driven, we don't know if it's terrorism.

A horrendous act by a despicable man, yes. Terrorism? Maybe.

From the UK (of all places), political goals are not required for the Nevada statutory definition of terrorism:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/las-vegas-shooting-nevada-terrorism-state-law-act-police-stephen-paddock-a7978456.html

ddt – October 02, 2017 08:33AM Reply Quote
ARL, did you see that episode of Bojack Horseman? Yeah, thoughts and prayers.

It took zero time for a commentor on RedState to go "thank God there were good guys with guns", said without irony. Who, the police?

And of course there's the "it's too soon to talk about gun control policy because THAT WOULD BE POLITICAL" talk.

ETA: yeah, fuck this guy, without lube, and with a cactus: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/alex-jones-channel-goes-bonkers-over-vegas-false-flag-a-new-civil-war-is-coming-to-overthrow-government/

ddt



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2017 08:33AM by ddt.

John Willoughby – October 02, 2017 08:37AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Quote
porruka
Quote
John Willoughby
Pedantic: A terrorist uses violence against civilians to effect political change. Until we know if this orgy of violence was politically driven, we don't know if it's terrorism.

A horrendous act by a despicable man, yes. Terrorism? Maybe.

From the UK (of all places), political goals are not required for the Nevada statutory definition of terrorism:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/las-vegas-shooting-nevada-terrorism-state-law-act-police-stephen-paddock-a7978456.html

Nevada can define things however they like, but "terrorism" had a definition before Nevada got a hold of the concept.

John Willoughby – October 02, 2017 08:40AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Gun manufacturers' stocks are up today. As always, after an incident like that people fear increased gun control and run out and buy more guns.

We really ought to just outlaw the production of ammunition. Support the Second Amendment, and people's right to use awkward metal, wood, and plastic clubs.

porruka (Admin) – October 02, 2017 09:17AM Reply Quote
Failure is pre-greatness.
Quote
John Willoughby
Quote
porruka
Quote
John Willoughby
Pedantic: A terrorist uses violence against civilians to effect political change. Until we know if this orgy of violence was politically driven, we don't know if it's terrorism.

A horrendous act by a despicable man, yes. Terrorism? Maybe.

From the UK (of all places), political goals are not required for the Nevada statutory definition of terrorism:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/las-vegas-shooting-nevada-terrorism-state-law-act-police-stephen-paddock-a7978456.html

Nevada can define things however they like, but "terrorism" had a definition before Nevada got a hold of the concept.

When it comes to the distinction between (T)errorism, terrorism, and insane people maiming and killing because the voices told them to, I lean toward "what we call things matters to the end goal of actually reducing said acts".

I'm not a fan of diluting the importance of certain terms by throwing around haphazardly, yet, (T)errorism seems to be the only vector of mass murder that gets "a war" these days.

If the definition exists (and it does, though it's rather broad when you look at the specific statute - pretty much any significant act or attempted act against "the general public"), then the avoidance of the term by _local_ law enforcement (you know, the folks who act under that statute) says something. Plain reading says that Nevada officials should be calling this terrorism.

Whether 45 does or not is a different (albeit equally interesting, given his previous proclamations) topic.

John Willoughby – October 02, 2017 09:45AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
I feel that there's a difference between mass murder for a non-political end and for a political one. I think that an accurate description of the crime leads to better solutions for the future.

If this was a non-political crime, for instance, I would imagine that solutions might (ought, at least) tend towards gun control and availability of psychological counselling for troubled individuals.

If this was a political crime, then the solution might be more on examination of immigration procedures, financial trails, and possibly retaliation against overseas targets.

I think that slapping a misleading label on something to get a specific level or kind of attention can lead to long term harm.

El Jeffe – October 02, 2017 10:04AM Reply Quote
What a journey.
I can't even talk about this crap it saddens me so much.

porruka (Admin) – October 02, 2017 10:26AM Reply Quote
Failure is pre-greatness.
Quote
John Willoughby
I think that slapping a misleading label on something to get a specific level or kind of attention can lead to long term harm.

Completely agreed there and encompassed in my T vs t terrorism (though perhaps it was too subtle for its own good). However, labeling almost every mass shooting (since there have been numerous data points) as mental illness hasn't moved the needle much in terms of better mental health care, has it? This is even ignoring whether it was actually mental illness behind it -- we should have some of the best mental health care in the world in the US given the seemingly-demonstrated need and in fact, the opposite is true with the lifting of restrictions on those who *have* been identified as mentally ill regaining freer access to weapons: http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/02/28/517799119/trump-repeals-rule-designed-to-block-gun-sales-to-certain-mentally-ill-people

Now, "Trump repeals rule designed to block gun sales to certain mentally ill people" vs "Trump repeals rule designed to block gun sales to certain domestic terrorists" - now, I'll be the first to admit this is a bit disingenuous, because the people the rule applied to would only be called terrorists after the fact should they actually commit mass murder while they are specifically being identified as mentally ill (or at least significantly reduced in capacity) before the fact.

Sometimes, a thing can simultaneously be multiple things (cf "terrorist" and "lone wolf"), and choosing one description over another conditions the reactions (also cf "thug" vs "victim", "threat" vs "neighbor").

John Willoughby – October 02, 2017 11:04AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
It is in the nature of language that words can mean multiple things, and that a recipient hears what the word means to him or her and not what it means to the speaker. I would think that that would argue for more precise meanings for words rather than expanding the meaning of words to encompass all possible interpretations. Others may differ, of course.

Is any shooting terrorism? Just if by civilians? Only if more than some number of people are shot? What is that number? What about a serial killer who may kill many, but over decades?

I don't need those questions answered, but just some thoughts based on conflating "mass shooting" with "terrorism."

John Willoughby – October 02, 2017 11:13AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
Guitarist in the band at the shooting:

https://twitter.com/Calebkeeter/status/914872808110510080



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2017 11:13AM by John Willoughby.

ARL (Moderator) – October 02, 2017 12:56PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
We may never know this guys motives but I think a safe one to assume is he's a believer in the second amendment. He has enforced that political belief pretty violently on hundreds of people. I call that domestic terrorism .



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/02/2017 12:57PM by ARL.

ARL (Moderator) – October 03, 2017 06:29AM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
DPBD

Maybe thinking of conceding point about diluting the meaning of the word terrorism (although pop quiz, how dangerously close does the modern NRA get to the definition of a terrorist group?)

On a tangent, a picture tells a thousand words:

http://www.smh.com.au/world/heres-why-australia-will-never-understand-the-us-obsession-with-guns-20171003-gyt7ys.html

John Willoughby – October 03, 2017 06:31AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
We should start a fund, that anybody could donate to, that would provide money to any candidate, regardless of their other political beliefs, that refused to accept money from the NRA, GOA, or other gun ownership advocacy groups. Donations to the group would skyrocket after tragedies like LV.

I think that the NRA provided a little over $3 million to congress members this year; how hard would that be to beat?

johnny k – October 03, 2017 10:01AM Reply Quote
Wonder how much the NRA's power is from the stick, not the carrot. Getting primaried is the new hotness.
A congressman wrote in the NYT about how part of the issue is that like every political animal in the current climate, the NRA is driven to an extreme perspective by competing lobbies. I don't know of any, but from what I remember, a large majority of gun owners want some more gun control — how about a moderate gun lobby that gives these people a voice, and a way to join with non-gun owners in a common cause?

John Willoughby – October 03, 2017 10:14AM Reply Quote
Save us, Lord, from the furries of the Norsemen!
I think that it would be hard to maintain moderate status. Some on the Left would portray you as hard right gun nuts, some on the Right would portray you as a subversive effort to undermine "true" gun owners. When I was current on this stuff, the NRA was the moderate choice; GoA was farther to the right. They may be still.

Fox & Friends said that CNN was partially to blame for the Las Vegas shootings, because they "demonize gun owners." I guess that, in the face of verbal criticism, anybody would snap and kill 50+ people.

ARL (Moderator) – October 04, 2017 05:41PM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!

ddt – October 07, 2017 08:14AM Reply Quote
Makers of Wolfenstein II: "We admit we assumed that nobody would identify with the Nazis and think they were the good guys": https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2017/10/bethesda-anti-nazi-game-wasnt-meant-to-incite-political-discussions/

Well, maybe both sides had some fine people!

ddt

El Jeffe – October 10, 2017 01:09AM Reply Quote
What a journey.

ARL (Moderator) – October 10, 2017 05:22AM Reply Quote
I whinge therefore I am!
A community service announcement on the tragic condition known as "nonsensical rifle addiction"

https://youtu.be/a-o9pwWUzz0

porruka (Admin) – October 10, 2017 07:13AM Reply Quote
Failure is pre-greatness.

Right or wrong, only history will tell, but Cook laid out a different vision for Apple going forward, one that (perhaps selectively at first) will use its power to support causes that align with the ethos of Apple. That article reads like a lot of pissed-in cornflakes, especially the "where's the line?" pablum when Apple specifically made moves to reduce lines via the pre-order program (which is unfortunately impossible to substantiate with a link right now for all the search noise of pre-ordering the current models).

Is Apple's innovation pipeline in trouble? Entirely possible. I wouldn't hold up this article as evidence of such, though.

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login