Mass Shooting in San Antonio

[JRSC00LUDE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Similar to the logic used in creating your own definitions out of thin air? Then when pressed for justification, you ignore it, and respond with another logical fallacy?

That's not proper logic, it is completely illogical.

Gestalt is a troll though. Or, just not yet diagnosed. Regardless, not much point in engagement.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Alluding to his atheism as "probably" having contributed to choosing the target, is a very problematic statement, for various reasons.

For one, it doesn't matter if the target is a church, or a store, they're all innocent victims of mentally deranged individuals.

But the biggest flaw in your reasoning is that you instantly identify the Christian as a lunatic but would never give an atheist or a Muslim the same kind of leeway.

That's just one of many logical fallacies you managed to fit into one post. Special pleading, shifting burden of proof, loaded questions, "no true Scotsman" etc.

Of course there all innocent victims of mentally deranged individuals, where have I denied that? However just because one has mental health issues, doesn't mean he can't have components of their deranged worldview that contributed to their motive or the picking of their targets. People who suffer from mental illness still have a worldview like everyone else. And I think its reasonable to suggest that he picked his target of a church, because of his hate for religious people. Why do you see that as problematic? Could something else surface that leads his targeting for a difference? Absolutely, and I would be completely open to that, its just that right based on the evidence we have now it seems like a pretty reasonable assumption to make.

As for claiming faulty reasoning because I "instantly identify the Christian as a lunatic but would never give an atheist or a Muslim the same kind of leeway", that just isn't true. I made the claim that the Walmart shooter was a lunatic, because of the evidence. I didn't instantly suggest that like you claimed. Had that walmart shooter been a relatively normal contributor of society then I wouldn't have been so quick to question his mental health. The problem is that that living with a stack of bibles and zero furniture is incredibly bizarre for a sane individual. You combine that with every eyewitness testimony of the walmart shooter that has made him out to be a evil lunatic, and it doesn't sound like you have someone dealing with a full deck. So if you want to claim that there is a flaw in my reasoning, then show me where I wouldn't give an atheist the same leeway? I think I did gave the atheist shooter similar leeway by questioning his mental health, just like I did with the walmart shooter.

As for claiming that I've made a bunch of logical fallacies, you have to show me how and where, you can't just claim that I'm guilty of a bunch of fallacies you probably don't fully understand.

[kertejud2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Just like I don't see this dudes atheism as a motivation for his crime, just for his targets.

So what you're trying to say is that this guy was going to try to shoot 40+ people regardless and he just happened to be atheist which made him want to pick a church. So had he been a Christian they just would have been different people at like say, a football game or a theatre?

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So what you're trying to say is that this guy was going to try to shoot 40+ people regardless and he just happened to be atheist which made him want to pick a church. So had he been a Christian they just would have been different people at like say, a football game or a theatre?

What I'm trying to say is exactly what I said, which is that I don't see his atheism as a motivation for his crime, because I don't think going and killing a bunch of innocent people is a coherent outworking of an atheistic worldview. However, because he did kill a bunch of religious people - and was outspoken about that such religious group, I think it is reasonable to assume that he may have targeted those people as a result of that belief.

Had this shooter been a guy that was publicly calling out minorities as stupid, then he went out and shot a bunch of minorities, I think it would be reasonable to assume without any other evidence that the shooter probably picked his targets as a result of his disdain for minorities.

Is there a better explanation?

[J-hop]

People are confusing atheism with anti-theism.

Regardless there is no “atheist doctrine” to justify killing. There is however doctrine in every major religion to justify killing. You really can’t lump atheism with religion they aren’t even in the same reality.

[Mitsu3000gt]

BBC said he obtained the guns illegally, and he was shot by a bystander, but died of a self inflicted gunshot. What a POS. RIP to the victims.

[codetrap]

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-p...s-r-1819576527 From 2014.

I guess that doing nothing is working out quite well. /shrug

[dj_patm]

Except the bystander shot him after the shooting.

Imagine if the guy shot someone who was carrying at the church trying to run away from the shooting...

Literally an example of a random civilian being judge, jury and executioner.




.... I love living in Canada.

[J-hop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Except the bystander shot him after the shooting.

Imagine if the guy shot someone who was carrying at the church trying to run away from the shooting...

Literally an example of a random civilian being judge, jury and executioner.




.... I love living in Canada.

Yea to me the whole ‘every civilian should carry’ idea doesn’t hold water.

First it obviously doesn’t deter people, every shooting in the US is a perfect example of that. They aren’t deterred by potential victims possibly having guns

Second the average gun owner has a very low level of skill and training with a gun. The chance of them hitting a bystander is extremely high.

Yea there will be the odd time where a potential victim is able to take down the attacker with a gun but I’m willing to bet that is minority of situations.

[dj_patm]

[J-hop]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Oh will... that guy is a bit of a whack job.

But yea those posts generally piss me off. A way to feel like you contributed to helping people without doing a damn thing

[kertejud2]

Only things that stops a bad guy getting a gun is data entry

Air Force Error Allowed Texas Gunman to Buy Weapons

]SUTHERLAND SPRINGS, Tex. — A day after a gunman massacred parishioners in a small Texas church, the Air Force admitted on Monday that it had failed to enter the man’s domestic violence court-martial into a federal database that could have blocked him from buying the rifle he used to kill 26 people.

Under federal law, the conviction of the gunman, Devin P. Kelley, for domestic assault on his wife and toddler stepson — he had cracked the child’s skull — should have stopped Mr. Kelley from legally purchasing the military-style rifle and three other guns he acquired in the last four years.

Motivation for targets wasn't his beliefs (or lack of them).

“The suspect’s mother-in-law attended this church,” Freeman Martin, a spokesman for the Texas Department of Public Safety, said at a news conference on Monday. “We know that he had made threatening texts,” he added, declining to elaborate.

“This was not racially motivated. It wasn’t over religious beliefs. It was a domestic situation going on,” Mr. Martin added.

Re: "Only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

He bought the guns in stores, in multiple states, all above board.

Academy Sports + Outdoors, which owns two San Antonio shops that each sold Mr. Kelley a gun in the last two years, said “both sales were approved by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.” Mr. Kelley had bought two other guns since his court-martial, both in Colorado, the authorities said.

In a rare win for multiple levels of bureaucracy acting as a check, he was rejected for a carrying permit at the state level.

But being rejected for such a license isn't reason to stop you from buying a gun.

a carrying license is not required to purchase a firearm from a gun shop so long as the buyer passes the federal background check.

So due to an oversight he was able to purchase guns legally, and picked his targets because he was out to get his mother-in-law, and wasn't stopped until after he had killed 26 people and injured many more.

[Modelexis]

I'm a gun owner and even I can admit that there are several facts about civilian gun ownership:

1. Owning a gun makes it easier and more likely for someone to commit suicide and succeed.
2. Owning a gun makes it easier for someone to going on a killing spree and succeed.
3. Owning a gun makes it easier and more likely for someone in the home to accidentally shoot themselves or others. (accidental discharge)
4. Guns are generally more effective killing machines than knives

Counter points would be, freedom, private property, self preservation, self determination, training equivalent to a police officer makes no sense why one would be allowed to carry and one would not.

Tons of points for and against, I'm a bit torn. I hold freedom and property rights to a very high standard but at the same time I can fully accept the reality that more guns means more violence and more death. True that it also means more protection and more safety in some situations so that's what makes it a tough call.

In the end I think I stand by the freedom and property rights position, harsh gun laws are uniquely difficult in USA because their southern border has the potential to smuggle a large amount of firearms.

Tough being a gun owner and looking at both sides, hate to see these mass shootings. Disgusting.

I think an age limit of 25 would be reasonable to purchase a gun, and I'm all for harsh background and mental health checks, lots more can be done but it's easier to say it than try and pass laws.

[tirebob]

I think trying to ban guns in the USA would lead to more violence and not less because gun ownershio is ingrained in them, it is part of their culture and it is their absolute right. There would be a shit ton more crazies come out of the woodwork guaranteed if they tried that.

[HuMz]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's sad to see that it was well meaning Christians who believed in " thoughts and prayers" slaughtered by this gunman, then to have people mock what they believe in after there dead. The worst part is that these same people don't attack those who have offered "thoughts and prayers", in tragedies that they don't politicize. Not too mention it does absolutely nothing to bring people together, but in fact polarizes the political climate even more.

- - - Updated - - -

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But yea those posts generally piss me off. A way to feel like you contributed to helping people without doing a damn thing

Kinda like a tweet that does nothing other than to piss well-intentioned people off?

[HuMz]

Only things that stops a bad guy getting a gun is data entry

Air Force Error Allowed Texas Gunman to Buy Weapons



Motivation for targets wasn't his beliefs (or lack of them).
Where is the evidence to back that up? If this was a score to settle with his mother in law, why would he kill everyone else instead?


Re: "Only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun"

That depends on what you use the word "Stopping". Did a good guy with a gun stop this from ever happening in the first place? No of course not, nor would anyone claim that. Did a good guy stop this shooting from inflicting further damage? And by all account this appears to be a yes. The hero didn't pursue the shooter after he was done, from every account I've read he was in the process of reloading when he engaged him. And it was the return fire from the hero that put the shooter on the run.

He bought the guns in stores, in multiple states, all above board.



In a rare win for multiple levels of bureaucracy acting as a check, he was rejected for a carrying permit at the state level.

But being rejected for such a license isn't reason to stop you from buying a gun.

While being rejected for carry permit doesn't stop you from buying a gun, having a prior conviction like he did does.


So due to an oversight he was able to purchase guns legally, and picked his targets because he was out to get his mother-in-law, and wasn't stopped until after he had killed 26 people and injured many more.

Yes, due to an oversight he was able to purchase his guns through a gun store. Do you know what multiple levels of bureacracy acting as a check is? That's called gun control. There was a gun control law that prevented this man from owning a firearm, only it wasn't properly followed. So now that we've established that it was the enforcement of the law, not the law itself, will that squash your calls for gun control on this?

As for he picked his targets because he was out to get his mother-in-law, that clearly wasn't the case if his mother wasn't even there, and everyone else was there. That may have been "a" particular motive that he didn't carry out, but it wasn't the motive for killing almost everyone but her

Now your using the word "stopping" in the other sense of the word I described above. He wasn't not stopped until after he killed 26 people and injured more, he was stopped after a hero NRA member ran across the street with his AR-15 to engage him while reloading.

[Xtrema]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It's sad to see that it was well meaning Christians who believed in " thoughts and prayers" slaughtered by this gunman, then to have people mock what they believe in after there dead. The worst part is that these same people don't attack those who have offered "thoughts and prayers", in tragedies that they don't politicize. Not too mention it does absolutely nothing to bring people together, but in fact polarizes the political climate even more.

Kinda like a tweet that does nothing other than to piss well-intentioned people off?

I think the last 2 mass shooting by white folks against country music lovers and church goers is the best thing ever happened in the term of narrative. Still sad on the deaths and injuries but I hope that wake some of them up that this is cost of uncontrolled gun ownership. As for Wil Wheaton, he is just frustrated just like many in US that thoughts and prayers is the default go to for all politicians and nothing is done. Not even faking to take any action. But since religious gun nuts got their president in, I don't think that will change anytime soon. It's to a point that even if Democrats take all 3 houses, you will still won't see any meaning reform on gun control.

And in this case, while they like to blame a clerical error that prevent him from being blacklisted, he can also get it from private sale even if he is blacklisted. The fact that US has more strict rules on pot than guns astound me.

To me, anyone who believes ideologies (religious or not) that promotes hate, discrimination has mental issue. It's just how far they take them before killing someone is normal.

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think trying to ban guns in the USA would lead to more violence and not less because gun ownershio is ingrained in them, it is part of their culture and it is their absolute right. There would be a shit ton more crazies come out of the woodwork guaranteed if they tried that.

The fact that gun companies stock always goes up after each mass shooting prove that you are right.

I don't think banning is the answer. Mass shooting will happen over and over again. Just like terrorism attacks. It's about finding ways to reduce the frequency. Gun death is 1/215,000 in Canada but it's 1/28,000 in US. And as far as I can tell gun ownership isn't that restrictive in Canada other than magazine size.

There are many factors that lead to these but I think the better social safety net you have in a country, the less of this will happen. Banning anything is never a solution.

[codetrap]

.

[Seth1968]

The USA has the highest infant mortality rate, constant mass shootings, poor education, poor health care, a shitty justice system, etc, etc, etc. Yet, the citizens are so tenacious that they still proclaim, "USA! USA! We're # 1, We're the best country in the world!!!"

Best at what exactly? Warfare? I see little to no redeeming qualities with that country.

[Gestalt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The USA has the highest infant mortality rate, constant mass shootings, poor education, poor health care, a shitty justice system, etc, etc, etc. Yet, the citizens are so tenacious that they still proclaim, "USA! USA! We're # 1, We're the best country in the world!!!"

Best at what exactly? Warfare? I see little to no redeeming qualities with that country.

At least compared to Canada, they have better weather.