Profile
Search
Register
Log in
Gabrielle Giffords shooting
View previous topic | View next topic >

Post new topic Reply to topic
Strange Famous Forum > Social stuff. Political stuff. KNOWMORE

Author Message
Z-0



Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 700
Location: Sydney
 Reply with quote  

i'm glad to know you think i'm cattle being herded.

I'm saying the greatest thing to come out of this mess IS the debate about inflammatory language, or images, or whatever. but the focus has been shifted to a traditionally hollow left vs right argument in the public, political, media spectrum. already the true debate is being swamped. i'm making an observation, nothing more.

and i'm sorry to say it, but as far as the politicians are concerned, it is politics as usual.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:51 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Z-0



Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 700
Location: Sydney
 Reply with quote  

i'll also say, until i hear exactly what this mans motives were i dont feel comfortable jumping on the "the republicans are to blame" bandwagon. he may well have been motivated by their rhetoric, but, i dont know that at this moment. until he speaks, which i understand he hasnt yet, everything remains speculation. but the debate about political rhetoric and its intensity is real. i'd rather focus on that.

but maybe i'm one of those folk without a clue, as you put it, who doesnt want to rush to conclusions about the actions of an insane man.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:08 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Bicycle



Joined: 17 Nov 2008
Posts: 413
 Reply with quote  

When has violence not been a part of the political lexicon?

the entire system was born, survives and continues to profit from it

People join the military/police for an outlet. So they can legally kill people. These people are all around you, indocrinated by GI Joe and non-stop sexualized violence in the media. What happens with that energy when it is denied release? What happens when you dont support the cause that would allow for such a release?

A lot of shit
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:11 am
 View user's profile Send private message
WrathChild



Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 953
Location: Reno eNVy
 Reply with quote  

Bicycle wrote:

People join the military/police for an outlet. So they can legally kill people.


WTF? Any studies that back this up?
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 10:09 am
 View user's profile Send private message
Bicycle



Joined: 17 Nov 2008
Posts: 413
 Reply with quote  

Absolutely not. but Ive had people tell me as much, and taken note of the attitudes present in the military men and criminal justice students that Ive encountered. Its a bit of an exaggeration to say they want to kill people, but they are adrenaline junkies and wouldn't mind doing it as long as they are able to justify it to themselves. Im speaking in universals, but obviously this doesn't apply to everyone

Also, as a child, my idols were GI joe, arnold swarzeneger and duke nukem. I thought it would be cool to be a police officer or an army man or someone whos allowed to shoot at people. Ive outgrown that to an extent but the seeds were planted and I can identify that strain in others.

Advertisements like this sell way more than video games:

[/url]

and no one is above influence
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:04 am
 View user's profile Send private message
RoNn1e



Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Posts: 3901
Location: MI.
 Reply with quote  

Bicycle wrote:

People join the military/police for an outlet. So they can legally kill people. These people are all around you, indocrinated by GI Joe and non-stop sexualized violence in the media. What happens with that energy when it is denied release? What happens when you dont support the cause that would allow for such a release?

A lot of shit


I really hope this is just well-played sarcasm. If not, you're a complete fucking idiot if you believe even one fragment of what's quoted above.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:29 am
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
NPS



Joined: 06 Oct 2010
Posts: 86
 Reply with quote  

RoNn1e wrote:
Bicycle wrote:

People join the military/police for an outlet. So they can legally kill people. These people are all around you, indocrinated by GI Joe and non-stop sexualized violence in the media. What happens with that energy when it is denied release? What happens when you dont support the cause that would allow for such a release?

A lot of shit


I really hope this is just well-played sarcasm. If not, you're a complete fucking idiot if you believe even one fragment of what's quoted above.


I disagree, I've heard PEOPLE, not a person, PEOPLE I've known tell me they are joining up so they can kill terrorists. Not so they can help reconstruct iraq or help bring peace to afghanistan, so they can kill.

Why are you so quick to jump on him for that statement Ronnie? You think its completely unfounded? Obviously not all or even close to the majority join up for these reasons (the majority join up with the sole reason of much needed employment or out of a belief that they can help the world) but there is definitely a fringe population that does.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:58 am
 View user's profile Send private message
WrathChild



Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 953
Location: Reno eNVy
 Reply with quote  

Bicycle wrote:
Absolutely not. but Ive had people tell me as much, and taken note of the attitudes present in the military men and criminal justice students that Ive encountered. Its a bit of an exaggeration to say they want to kill people, but they are adrenaline junkies and wouldn't mind doing it as long as they are able to justify it to themselves. Im speaking in universals, but obviously this doesn't apply to everyone

Also, as a child, my idols were GI joe, arnold swarzeneger and duke nukem. I thought it would be cool to be a police officer or an army man or someone whos allowed to shoot at people. Ive outgrown that to an extent but the seeds were planted and I can identify that strain in others.

Advertisements like this sell way more than video games:


and no one is above influence


Thanks for the clarification, but how many experiences have you had with officers or military personnel who have actually killed someone? Has any of them said they "didn't mind doing it"? There's a distinct difference between the motivations to murder and the motivations to join the military or law enforcement. Not saying there aren't murderers in either profession, but they are hardly the norm and certainly aren't "all around you".
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:04 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
jakethesnake
guy who cried about wrestling being real


Joined: 03 Feb 2006
Posts: 6311
Location: airstrip one
 Reply with quote  

"Compassion is the radicalism of our time."
Dalai Lama
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:15 pm
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
WrathChild



Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 953
Location: Reno eNVy
 Reply with quote  

NPS wrote:


I disagree, I've heard PEOPLE, not a person, PEOPLE I've known tell me they are joining up so they can kill terrorists. Not so they can help reconstruct iraq or help bring peace to afghanistan, so they can kill.



This is almost always false bravado. The military has done extensive studies on what makes soldiers intentionally miss when engaging targets. Even when the shooters life is in immediate danger. It's not easy to make rational people kill, especially in close combat situations. The best way is to strip the humanity away from the enemy. The same way that was done to the slaves. Make them less than human. That's the propaganda these people are speaking of when they say they want to "kill terrorists". Trust me, it's a totally different story when that "non-human" is in your sights and your finger is on the trigger. Killing is incredibly traumatizing. That's the difference between a soldier and a murderer.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:18 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
CriticalTheory_Breakfast



Joined: 16 Apr 2007
Posts: 1404
Location: NYC/Rochester
 Reply with quote  

Glenn Beck hopes someone doesn't kill Sarah Palin
http://tinyurl.com/4u6k83p

In the wake of Saturday’s Tucson, Ariz., shooting that left Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in critical condition, six dead and more than a dozen injured, former Alaska gov. Sarah Palin reached out to Fox’s Glenn Beck via e-mail.
“Sarah, as you know, peace is always the answer. I know you are felling the same heat, if not much more on this,” Beck wrote Palin in an e-mail, which he read on-air during his radio program Monday.
[ For complete coverage of politics and policy, go to Yahoo! Politics ]

“I want you to know you have my full support,” Beck told Palin. “You are always in my thoughts and prayers.”
Concerned for her safety, Beck urged Palin to protect herself and invest in more security because an “attempt on you could bring the Republic down.”
“There are nutjobs on all sides,” Beck said. “Tomorrow I am issuing a challenge to reject all violence. If people really believe Americans can become some version of al Qaeda, I will not stand in the shadows as too many overseas did after 9/11. Terror is terror. I don’t care if it’s for Allah or for your party, you are not a freedom fighter, but a killer. There is a difference between a hard-fought political battle and violence … It’s time for politics to stop and sanity to begin.”
Palin responded, “I hate violence. I hate war. Our children will not have peace if politicos just capitalize on this to succeed in portraying anyone as inciting terror and violence. Thanks for all you do to send the message of truth and love and God as the answer.”
Beck went on to say a few brief words about Giffords, who he had talked about on his show once before.
“I used her as an example of someone with some political courage,” Beck said.
Since Saturday’s massacre, both Beck and Palin have been criticized by dozens of pundits and bloggers. Palin has been accused of inspiring the incident for creating a map during elections targeting districts of several liberal lawmakers, including Giffords’s district, with the cross hairs of a rifle scope and instructing her followers, “Don’t retreat, reload.”
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:24 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
WrathChild



Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 953
Location: Reno eNVy
 Reply with quote  

Glenn Beck wrote:
" … It’s time for politics to stop and sanity to begin.”




Hopefully it starts with you, Glenn.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 12:30 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
Bicycle



Joined: 17 Nov 2008
Posts: 413
 Reply with quote  

Killing someone, I imagine, would bring with it a completely different reality then any desire to do so. Most of you have probably seen the wikileaks collateral murder video and listened to the soldiers responses as they carried out murder that they thought was justified. This is probably not indicative of everyone but these guys are trained to react in such a way. but the training doesn't start at the military

Any talk of violence in the media gets side tracked to an argument of whether art influences life or vice versa. This argument ignores the core issue which is that the media, in its current configuration, is little more than a tool for delivering propaganda. And its incredibly efficient at doing so. So from an early age we are pumped full of ideals of heroism mixed with violent and sadistic imagery that is tethered to our primal sexual urges by way of sexy young actors and actresses. If you need proof of this please refer to SVU or Spike TV. Its all boobs, blood and broken bones. All of these images are rendered unto our subconcious which doesn't differentiate between reality and fiction and doesn't forget anything. The propaganda techniques become more refined with time and the populace allows more and more of it. What you're left with is a bunch of psychopaths looking for a way to exercise their demons. Which is all fine and dandy if you can channel that energy into the correct avenue, but sometimes people slip through the cracks and this is what you end up with

I dont see a difference between a soldier and a murderer. This dude was able to justify his actions to himself and willing to throw his life away to accomplish his mission. I dont know how to feel about it. My personal stance is non-violence but I get exited when someone stirs the shit around. and crazy people are just more interesting
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:06 pm
 View user's profile Send private message
medicineman
HALFLING


Joined: 21 Apr 2007
Posts: 1393
Location: Iowa City
 Reply with quote  

WrathChild wrote:
NPS wrote:


I disagree, I've heard PEOPLE, not a person, PEOPLE I've known tell me they are joining up so they can kill terrorists. Not so they can help reconstruct iraq or help bring peace to afghanistan, so they can kill.



This is almost always false bravado. The military has done extensive studies on what makes soldiers intentionally miss when engaging targets. Even when the shooters life is in immediate danger. It's not easy to make rational people kill, especially in close combat situations. The best way is to strip the humanity away from the enemy. The same way that was done to the slaves. Make them less than human. That's the propaganda these people are speaking of when they say they want to "kill terrorists". Trust me, it's a totally different story when that "non-human" is in your sights and your finger is on the trigger. Killing is incredibly traumatizing. That's the difference between a soldier and a murderer.


I don't have a lot of experience with it but this seems to be true to me. I don't want to completely discredit what Bicycle is saying because I think there are kernels of truth in there but its not the whole story. A friend of mine who was killed in Iraq was very likely killed because he was hesitant to fire, even after he had already been fired upon. That's not the official story, but its the drift of what comes from his unit. I had another friend who was a Ranger who, it turned out after getting to know him better, had seen a number of bloody missions during his tour. He's a nice guy, really. The type of guy who will bounce you off the turf if you hurt one of his friends, or a woman, but not without provocation. But his training had done exactly what WrathChild has said...dehumanize the enemy. They are generally not referred to as human beings. It is generally not referred to as killing. "Suppressed", he always said. He had "suppressed" a number of people, including unarmed men, because it was part of his mission. It wasn't something he was proud of, or liked to brag about. But one day we had a long conversation...somewhat strangely, we were talking about military technology and firearms we are fond of...and a lot came tumbling out.
Post Tue Jan 11, 2011 2:24 pm
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address
crash



Joined: 07 Aug 2003
Posts: 5456
Location: the chocolate city with a marshmallow center and a graham cracker crust of corruption
 Reply with quote  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/12/sarah-palin-response-arizona-shooting

‎"Journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible."

- Sarah Palin, using the term "blood libel" in a video where she explains why rhetoric isn't extreme.

edit: i don't think we can blame republicans for this one. but the things are, i don't think it will be long until there is some glen beck inspired shooter. i posted this on facebook on monday:


Quote:

I think it’s too early to say if the extreme rhetoric used by some on the right had anything to do motivating Jared Loughner to kill 6 people this past Saturday, but I don’t think it’s the wrong time to call for an end to that sort of talk. It’s all too easy to use fear as a motivator. It gets people to the polls, it raises money for campaigns, it increases TV ratings, but it is NOT without consequences. When you tell people their way of life is under attack, when you scare them with false specters of Death Panels and Brown Shirts, when you warn of the US legal system being replaced by Sharia, you inevitably enrage some individuals who have the propensity for violence and are willing to take vigilante action to “save” their country.

Whatever Loughner’s motivation turns out to be, we need a change in tone. Our country is straying from its core values, and I’m not talking about the 2nd amendment or free market system. We’re abandoning our tradition of compromise and civil debate. After all, when your political opponent is threatening your very way of life, you clearly can’t compromise with him.

So here’s to hoping that something positive can come out of this tragedy - not so the Democrats can score some easy political points, but so we get back to a place where compromise is not a dirty word.
Post Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:42 am
 View user's profile Send private message AIM Address

Post new topic Reply to topic
Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
All times are GMT - 6 Hours.
The time now is Fri Oct 31, 2014 2:47 pm
  Display posts from previous:      


Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
Template created by The Fathom
Based on template of Nick Mahon