Bottom post of the previous page:
This is perfectly plausible, but I'm still gonna need a source.Drynwyn wrote: There was however a google bomb by 4chan with the deliberate intent to introduce the false information that the shooter had definitive leftist associations.
fuck you i laughedlntigracy wrote:So in some of the pics you see a guy running with his beer in hand.
Why bother? The shots were free.
That's called empathy. Its the same reason that people who were alive on 9/11/2001 are often affected by the events even without any sort of personal direct connection. It could also be the based in a small amount of patriotism/nationalistic sentiment. On a basic level, nobody wants these sorts of things to happen to them or people like them or people that they share a certain level of kinship with. When you hear a story about a bunch of brown people dying in the middle of nowhere, it sounds bad because people died, but it doesn't have a personal connection because they're too many degrees of separation away. In this case, you were in the same town, the people who died probably looked like you, the person who did it probably looks at least similar to you in enough ways to matter, and it happened in a country where you live governed by the same laws you follow. You can mentally connect enough dots to make emotionally stick.starmute wrote:I don't know how to deal with this. I shouldn't care this much but I do.
Let me go through this logically
I wasn't involved
Why the hell am I so sad? I do love Las Vegas but shouldn't human instinct come in and say "You didn't do anything wrong, this is not your fault"
This is all just fucked up.
Why would anyone do this? Yes you can throw around conspiracy theories but.. just this is fucked up no matter how you think about it.
Maybe I'll find out why someone would do this... but it makes me feel horrible. Seeing that blood come out of that ladies mouth when someone checked her pulse.
Sorry I just.. need to vent and I can't think of anywhere else to post this.
I know its empathy. Just.. usually there is a reason for these horrible things. There are usually signs of a person being a wing-nut. This is just.. nothing. These people were just slaughtered for... no apparent reason.cedarbridge wrote:
That's called empathy. Its the same reason that people who were alive on 9/11/2001 are often affected by the events even without any sort of personal direct connection. It could also be the based in a small amount of patriotism/nationalistic sentiment. On a basic level, nobody wants these sorts of things to happen to them or people like them or people that they share a certain level of kinship with. When you hear a story about a bunch of brown people dying in the middle of nowhere, it sounds bad because people died, but it doesn't have a personal connection because they're too many degrees of separation away. In this case, you were in the same town, the people who died probably looked like you, the person who did it probably looks at least similar to you in enough ways to matter, and it happened in a country where you live governed by the same laws you follow. You can mentally connect enough dots to make emotionally stick.
That was disproven. He doesn't have any political affiliations.calzilla1 wrote:He was a salty Hillary supporter so maybe thats a reason
https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... oter-news/DemonFiren wrote:This is perfectly plausible, but I'm still gonna need a source.Drynwyn wrote: There was however a google bomb by 4chan with the deliberate intent to introduce the false information that the shooter had definitive leftist associations.
Shots firedDemonFiren wrote:Intigracy is just taking some cheap shots at the situation.
Sounds to me like this isn't an intentional thing, and more just 4chan talking about it so much that google picked it up as a news site through algoritms, and the 4chan digging was picked up too and followed as if it was actual journalists by googleDrynwyn wrote:https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... oter-news/DemonFiren wrote:This is perfectly plausible, but I'm still gonna need a source.Drynwyn wrote: There was however a google bomb by 4chan with the deliberate intent to introduce the false information that the shooter had definitive leftist associations.
Meant to link this in the original researchpost, but forgot to. My apologies, lizardfriend.
/pol/ is always rightXSI wrote:Sounds to me like this isn't an intentional thing, and more just 4chan talking about it so much that google picked it up as a news site through algoritms, and the 4chan digging was picked up too and followed as if it was actual journalists by googleDrynwyn wrote:https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... oter-news/DemonFiren wrote:This is perfectly plausible, but I'm still gonna need a source.Drynwyn wrote: There was however a google bomb by 4chan with the deliberate intent to introduce the false information that the shooter had definitive leftist associations.
Meant to link this in the original researchpost, but forgot to. My apologies, lizardfriend.
Which is fair, really. They do dig more than actual journalists. It's just that they immediately post any sort of result or name they find instead of double and triple checking if this person is involved. That's for other people who are also digging to establish.
Imagine being in the room with a few hundred people all looking up stuff. If one of them finds a lead, he tells the others. This doesn't mean it's a conclusion yet, it just means they found something that's possibly related and are looking into it.
So blame google for that one, not 4chan. 4chan was just doing its usual intel gathering to figure shit out, google decided this meant they were authorities on the shooting and reported it as such
No different than the gun grabbers clamoring for even more gun control before he was even done shootingColonicAcid wrote: like for real y'all a buncha fucking vultures, the bodies weren't even cold and you fucks were already trying to figure out if he was a muslim, antifa or a fucking trump supporter.
Both dummyGrazyn wrote:Which one is more believable to you
killing a lot of people because you don't like them
or
killing a lot of people to maybe force a change in gun laws because you think gun laws cause a lot of deaths (which is the main reason dems use)
I'd go for "killing a lot of people to force a change in gun laws because disarming the people is the first step towards full authoritarian control which is the endgame for democrats"
And, to you tough-talking Neo-Cons with your AR-15 rifles and a few thousand rounds of ammo, here is the reality: they will take your guns, and no, all your Second Amendment bluster aside, you are not going to do anything about it. You are not going to take on a platoon of Marines with state-of-the-art automatic weapons and the best body armor you cannot buy protected by armed personnel carriers and attack helicopters unless you choose to die that day — for nothing. You will either be in the country or out, and if you are in, you will stay in and you will comply.
Glad we've summed up that the left isn't anti-gun, they're anti-everyone-but-the-gummint having guns. Personally, I'm thrilled about racing further and further into a dystopian police state. Did I mention that the police are awful racist people who should die because they shoot too many people who aren't white? God I hate cops. Anyway, lets make sure only cops have guns so they can use their guns to take away your guns so only they can have guns.Grazyn wrote:PSA: https://dailyreckoning.com/when-they-co ... them-over/
And, to you tough-talking Neo-Cons with your AR-15 rifles and a few thousand rounds of ammo, here is the reality: they will take your guns, and no, all your Second Amendment bluster aside, you are not going to do anything about it. You are not going to take on a platoon of Marines with state-of-the-art automatic weapons and the best body armor you cannot buy protected by armed personnel carriers and attack helicopters unless you choose to die that day — for nothing. You will either be in the country or out, and if you are in, you will stay in and you will comply.
I'm just baffled by the sort of logic that on one hand will tell you that the cops/military/government are not your friends and they are evil, minority-murdering, sociopaths, but you should give them your guns because they're more trustworthy to hold them because reasons.Incomptinence wrote:Expecting to best the monster of a military you created in a civil war scenario where it takes the gloves off and treats you like syrians.
Good luck with that.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Agoracedarbridge wrote:Glad we've summed up that the left isn't anti-gun, they're anti-everyone-but-the-gummint having guns. Personally, I'm thrilled about racing further and further into a dystopian police state. Did I mention that the police are awful racist people who should die because they shoot too many people who aren't white? God I hate cops. Anyway, lets make sure only cops have guns so they can use their guns to take away your guns so only they can have guns.Grazyn wrote:PSA: https://dailyreckoning.com/when-they-co ... them-over/
And, to you tough-talking Neo-Cons with your AR-15 rifles and a few thousand rounds of ammo, here is the reality: they will take your guns, and no, all your Second Amendment bluster aside, you are not going to do anything about it. You are not going to take on a platoon of Marines with state-of-the-art automatic weapons and the best body armor you cannot buy protected by armed personnel carriers and attack helicopters unless you choose to die that day — for nothing. You will either be in the country or out, and if you are in, you will stay in and you will comply.
Guns
The position is stupid no matter who supports it, frankly.starmute wrote:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Agoracedarbridge wrote:Glad we've summed up that the left isn't anti-gun, they're anti-everyone-but-the-gummint having guns. Personally, I'm thrilled about racing further and further into a dystopian police state. Did I mention that the police are awful racist people who should die because they shoot too many people who aren't white? God I hate cops. Anyway, lets make sure only cops have guns so they can use their guns to take away your guns so only they can have guns.Grazyn wrote:PSA: https://dailyreckoning.com/when-they-co ... them-over/
And, to you tough-talking Neo-Cons with your AR-15 rifles and a few thousand rounds of ammo, here is the reality: they will take your guns, and no, all your Second Amendment bluster aside, you are not going to do anything about it. You are not going to take on a platoon of Marines with state-of-the-art automatic weapons and the best body armor you cannot buy protected by armed personnel carriers and attack helicopters unless you choose to die that day — for nothing. You will either be in the country or out, and if you are in, you will stay in and you will comply.
Guns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Bonner_(author)
Except you know the "Daily Reckoning" is a conservative newsletter written by Agoria Inc which is owned by Bill Bonner. Bill is a basically just a scaremonger. He and Mike Huckabee recently tried a scam to say cinnamon cures diabetes.
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/201 ... ble-cures/
So yeah.. check your sources for bias.
He's trying to scare you. As usual.Grazyn wrote:He may be biased but he is just stating a fact: if the government wants to take your guns, they will take them, and you can either die or hand them over.
I have no idea what any of this means, but it hurt my head trying to read it.CosmicScientist wrote:I guess at least I get to sit in my bubble of the PM admitted the fault of her party lay with her, she failed to give a speech, people are having to brown nose to excuse her (my voice is breaking in sympathy for her voice breaking), being ill is the excuse for the poor speech, her party's slogan fell apart behind her... it's all fun this side of the pond. I mean, for people not in Catalonia and for anyone who isn't wondering who will Theresa or what peculiarity is going on if they don't replace her.
Oh well, Bwiton still has far too long until the next general election but at least it'll be harder for them to pass damaging reforms.
Common conservative/alt-right opinion is that dems don't want to ban guns to prevent these shootings (they wouldn't organize the shootings in the first place if they did) but to prevent people from fighting back when their authoritarian government will impose their socialist reforms. Such a government would obviously ignore any public opinion backlash because it's, well, authoritarian, and once they have taken your guns they would be free to do anything, even cancel or alter elections.CosmicScientist wrote:"So, the purple party took all of guns, killed our neighbours and dragged me nan across the floor by her hair when she wouldn't let go of her shotgun. What's on the ballot box?"Grazyn wrote:He may be biased but he is just stating a fact: if the government wants to take your guns, they will take them, and you can either die or hand them over.
"Purple party and orange party."
"Let's vote orange."
Voter turnout largest in decades, purple party vanishes from the polls, minority parties swept what were secure purple seats, orange is free to do whatever they want, businesses and newspapers afraid of supporting purple party candidates forevermore and their children.
Sounds like the basis for a cool vidya, actually. Like Red Faction but not on Mars.Grazyn wrote:You mention places that have known war since time meant shit. Afghanistan especially. And suffered millions of casualties compared to the thousands on the US side. I have a feeling that once the first reports of hundreds of "uncompliant armed combatant" killed in the town next door start coming in, people will carefully line their guns in the street so the military can just sweep them up.