[Leonard D Neubache]

Welfare leads to single moms leads to depressed boys leads to psych meds leads to full blown insanity.

The left believe that having a nation of bitter, mentally ill people is just fine as long as none of them have guns. This is why every mental illness is now being pushed as a form of diversity. You can have MPD but if you identify as being a foxkin twinsoul then you're no longer a lunatic, you're a beautiful thread in the rainbow tapestry. A blind eye is then turned to your self-destructive and socially dangerous behaviour, which is thereafter defined as being caused by whoever in society is oppressing you from expressing your true, beautiful self. Namely sane people.

This will get needlessly worse before it gets better. Sane America needs to separate and insulate itself from insane America until the latter consumes itself.

[Roosh]

Clearer version of Snapchat during shooting: https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9ff_1518644376

[Roosh]

Carrying off the wounded: https://www.instagram.com/p/BfMo-8nADKq/...rickaduval

[renotime]

The news gets dumber and dumber by the day.

[Vaun]

(02-14-2018 07:53 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

The goal of discussing politics with Liberals is not, and should never be, to convince them, nor to convert them. The goal of discussing politics with Liberals is to frustrate and demoralize them, so that they anticipate being frustrated and demoralized were they to propose their ideas to the wider world.

You are on to something, but its not to frustrate them, and you wont demoralize them with your argument, its to get them to speak louder and louder, more and more, about their ideas. The more they talk, the more their ultimate goals for humanity are revealed. And thats their worst nightmare, and why "socialist" candidates cant get no traction in the US. You can't sway the ambivalent with the message of "control!".

[Synezthetic]

I live not too far away, elsewhere in Broward, closer to Ft. Lauderdale.
Parkland/Coral Springs area probably has the quietest, most suburban feel to it of all the places in South FL.

[Razors Edge]

(02-14-2018 05:22 PM)Abelard Lindsey Wrote:  

What meds was the shooter on or recently gotten off of?

yeah damm that medication...

lol

[kbell]

#guncontrol is trending on twitter even though it only has 64k tweets. Would be nice if they pushed the mental illness factor more, and how to reduce it in the future, rather than trying force gun confiscation. They really don't want us to be able to defend ourselves for some reason.

[stugatz]

I have no interest in debating a leftist on something like this. Gun ownership is a right, full stop, and it isn't up for debate. If you debate them on their terms at ALL, you've already lost.

You can always pretend to debate, though, triggering them is just fine. The right to own guns doesn't extend to Antifa sympathizers, duh.

[Sonoma]

Considering there's 300 million people and 300 million guns, it's surprising this doesn't happen more.

Condolences for the victims

[EndsExpect]

(02-14-2018 07:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

My experience heading to the tail end of my 30s is that no matter how skilled my dialogue, no matter how close I was to a person as a friend, no matter how much evidence I brought to bear, no leftist I spoke to was ever persuaded to abandon their puerile belief systems.
It's now my belief that leftism is simply an ego-driven manifestation of teenage self-worship that some sufferers fail to recover from for decades or perhaps their entire lives.

I completely agree that Liberalism is 100% ego driven. However, it isn't that hard to convert feminists to be honest. I mean hit them with strong alpha frame and dish out some hot dickings... it won't take long for the fat to start melting away and the purple hair to go blond. I've personally done this at least twice... took about 6 months.

(02-14-2018 10:48 PM)Sonoma Wrote:  

Considering there's 300 million people and 300 million guns, it's surprising this doesn't happen more.
Condolences for the victims

Get out of here with that bullshit. Switzerland has one of the highest gun ownership rates in the world and also one of the lowest murder rates.

Honduras has low gun ownership... and is number 1 in murders.

[Off The Reservation]

Dirty Debbie

[GoingTheDistance]

Well, I’ll be the first and maybe only person to say this on this thread: white Americans have a problem with mass shootings. I’ll be the first to call out the Muslim community when some infidel gets Allah Akbared, but by the same token I have to be the first to call out my white American community when some school kids get Rambo’ed.

I should note first that it’s impossible for me to say how much of this is a white American problem because there’s no official American (or universal) standard for what counts as a mass shooting. Therefore, statistics vary depending on who is conducting them. Finding neutrality in statistical findings can also be hard to find in such a politicized topic.

The “Stanford Mass Shootings of America (MSA) data project” seems to be the most legit and neutral source for mass shootings, though you have to request a copy of their data which I didn’t want to research for RVF posting purposes. Even there, I’m not sure if they have recorded race or ethnicity in that project either. The FBI also posts “active shooter incident” reports, but they don’t have any hard stats on race.

Since there's no official American or universal standard for what counts as a mass shooting, my thesis becomes a little bit murkier. White Americans do seem to come out on top numerically in every study that I researched when it comes to committing the most mass shootings, though in those studies white Americans are not that far off from their proportion to the overall population at large. Nevertheless, I will try to do the topic justice.

Thesis: “White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media”.

1. Thesis: White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media.

Now the question becomes how the link between single parent households and mass shooters if there is no clear definition of a mass shooter?

While it's impossible to get a real scientific study done without a clear definition, we do know that some of the more famous mass shooters like the Boston Bomber or Dylan Roof came from single family households.

The source that they came from fatherless and single households is here:

- http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/14/gues...less-home/

So where there's smoke there must be fire. Below I have quoted the main findings of the study with the source linked below as well:

Source: https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/a...?ID=167327

Quote:

The Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency reports that the most reliable indicator of violent crime in a community is the proportion of fatherless families.

If we go by what that journal says, and then see this nice little chart that Pew Research put up from 2014:



Than it shouldn't be a surprise that there seems to be a link between mass shootings and single parent households if we have so many single parent households in the USA. Though again how strong that link is can not be measured if we do not have a clear definition on what mass shootings are.

2. Thesis: White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media.

We have established that there's a link between mass shooters and single parent households, though we can not measure how strong that link is without a clear definition of what mass shootings are.

However, staying on that topic I found this interesting tidbit:

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3175702

Quote:

Abstract
The prevalence of psychiatric and psychosomatic disorders in a 1 year birth cohort from northern Finland followed up until 19 years was examined on the basis of hospital records and national registers for subsidies for chronically sick children.

Psychiatric disorders were found to occur with higher frequency in children of single parent families, especially those lacking a father during the child's whole life.

Ok, so we have a link between fatherless (single parent) households and psychiatric/psychosomatic (mental) disorders from a professional study done by the US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health.

Amazingly, I can not find a single source that shows a correlation between mental health and mass shootings. The first 20 pages of google searches are full of articles saying something along the lines of "links between mental health and mass shootings do not exists and to suggest otherwise is foolish."

I don't think that it's a coincidence that I can't find articles when searching on Google that argue that mental health affects mass shootings.

So while I can provide credible sources that show a link between single parent (and fatherless) households and mental illnesses, I can't connect those links to mass shootings because nothing is showing up on Google when is search for them.

3. Thesis: White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media.

Source: http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2...agion.aspx

Quote:

DENVER — People who commit mass shootings in America tend to share three traits: rampant depression, social isolation and pathological narcissism, according to a paper presented at the American Psychological Association’s annual convention that calls on the media to deny such shooters the fame they seek.

“Mass shootings are on the rise and so is media coverage of them,” said Jennifer B. Johnston, PhD, of Western New Mexico University. “At this point, can we determine which came first? Is the relationship merely unidirectional: More shootings lead to more coverage? Or is it possible that more coverage leads to more shootings?”

Johnston and her coauthor, Andrew Joy, BS, also of Western New Mexico University, reviewed data on mass shootings amassed by media outlets, the FBI and advocacy organizations, as well as scholarly articles, to conclude that “media contagion” is largely responsible for the increase in these often deadly outbursts. They defined mass shootings as either attempts to kill multiple people who are not relatives or those resulting in injuries or fatalities in public places.

The prevalence of these crimes has risen in relation to the mass media coverage of them and the proliferation of social media sites that tend to glorify the shooters and downplay the victims, Johnston said.

“We suggest that the media cry to cling to ‘the public’s right to know’ covers up a greedier agenda to keep eyeballs glued to screens, since they know that frightening homicides are their No. 1 ratings and advertising boosters,” she said.

The demographic profile of mass shooters is fairly consistent, she said. Most are white, ostensibly heterosexual males, largely between the ages of 20 and 50. They tend to see themselves as “victims of injustice,” and share a belief that they have been cheated out of their rightful dominant place as white, middle-class males.

“Unfortunately, we find that a cross-cutting trait among many profiles of mass shooters is desire for fame,” she said. This quest for fame among mass shooters skyrocketed since the mid-1990s “in correspondence to the emergence of widespread 24-hour news coverage on cable news programs, and the rise of the internet during the same period.”

She cited several media contagion models, most notably one proposed by Towers et al. (2015), which found the rate of mass shootings has escalated to an average of one every 12.5 days, and one school shooting on average every 31.6 days, compared to a pre-2000 level of about three events per year. “A possibility is that news of shooting is spread through social media in addition to mass media,” she said.

“If the mass media and social media enthusiasts make a pact to no longer share, reproduce or retweet the names, faces, detailed histories or long-winded statements of killers, we could see a dramatic reduction in mass shootings in one to two years,” she said. “Even conservatively, if the calculations of contagion modelers are correct, we should see at least a one-third reduction in shootings if the contagion is removed.”

She said this approach could be adopted in much the same way as the media stopped reporting celebrity suicides in the mid-1990s after it was corroborated that suicide was contagious. Johnston noted that there was “a clear decline” in suicide by 1997, a couple of years after the Centers for Disease Control convened a working group of suicidologists, researchers and the media, and then made recommendations to the media.

“The media has come together before to work for good, to incite social change,” she said. “They have done, and they can do it. It is time. It is enough.”

Thesis: White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media.

Conclusion: It's apparent that single parent households are a fucking disaster. That chart that I showed shows how much single parent households have increased in the USA over the past few generations. There are studies that show, as I cited earlier, that children are more likely to have mental illnesses in single parent and fatherless households.

Which makes it even more surprising that single parents are so celebrated in America, as if that's a good thing despite academic and scientific studies clearly showing otherwise.

It is my belief that that an increase in mass shootings among white Americans, if there is actually an increase, can partially be attributed to the result of (rapidly increasing) single parent households that cause mental illnesses in their children along with a rise in narcissism that leads to "media contagion" as that article that I posted stated.

On the individual level, white Americans can fix the fatherless households by trying to have a strong traditional nuclear family, despite all the obstacles that lay in our way in society right now. We can't really do anything about the "media contagion" with news station showing the shooters faces for a week straight and giving the shooters lots of attention. That's on the media, individuals can't do much about that.

While Google doesn't provide me with any sources that give a link between mental illness and mass shootings, my simple mind thinks that there is surely some type of link there.

Final Note: When somebody wants to debate you on guns, tell them to stop promoting fatherless families and encouraging the destruction of the traditional nuclear family.

[Suits]

(02-14-2018 10:43 PM)stugatz Wrote:  

Gun ownership is a right, full stop, and it isn't up for debate.

Damn right, it is.

If only America could go back to the days of low crime where carry guns everywhere openly and freely was a normal activity.

Here's a story that will inspire every red blooded American to love his country even more than he does already.

Quote:

On May 19, 1920, twelve Baldwin-Felts agents, including Lee Felts, arrived in Matewan, West Virginia and promptly met up with Albert Felts, who was already in the area. Albert and Lee were the brothers of Thomas Felts, the co-owner and director of the agency. Albert had already been in the area, and had tried to bribe Mayor Testerman with $500.00 to place machine guns on roofs in the town, which Testerman refused.

Those libtards can shut up about gun control. America was once a place where you were free to setup machine gun nests in quiet towns. Of course, even back 100 years ago, that didn't stop union loving liberals like Testerman from trying to deprive the American people off their rights.

Quote:

That afternoon, Albert and Lee along with eleven other men set out to the Stone Mountain Coal Company property. The first family they evicted was a woman and her children, whose husband was not home at the time. They forced them out at gunpoint, and threw their belongings in the road under a light but steady rain.

'merica!

Quote:

As the agents walked to the train station to leave town, Police Chief Sid Hatfield and a group of deputized miners confronted them and told the agents they were under arrest. Albert Felts replied that in fact, he had a warrant for Sid's arrest. Testerman was alerted, and he ran out into the street after a miner shouted that Sid had been arrested. Hatfield backed into the store, and Testerman asked to see the warrant.

After reviewing it, the mayor exclaimed, "This is a bogus warrant." With these words, a gunfight erupted and Sid Hatfield shot Albert Felts. Mayor Testerman and Albert and Lee Felts were among the 10 men killed (3 from the town, and 7 from the agency).

An armed society is a polite society.

Quote:

This gunfight became known as the Matewan Massacre, and its symbolic significance was enormous for the miners. The seemingly invincible Baldwin-Felts had been beaten. Sid Hatfield became an immediate legend and hero to the union miners, and became a symbol of hope that the oppression of coal operators and their hired guns could be overthrown.

Throughout the summer and into the fall of 1920, the union gained strength in Mingo County, as did the resistance of the coal operators. Low-intensity warfare was waged up and down the Tug River. In late June, state police under the command of Captain Brockus raided the Lick Creek tent colony near Williamson, West Virginia.

Miners were said to have fired on Brockus and Martin's men from the colony, and in response the state police shot and arrested miners, ripped the canvas tents to shreds, and scattered the mining families' belongings. Both sides were bolstering their arms, and Sid Hatfield continued to be a problem, especially when he converted Testerman's jewelry store into a gun shop.

Damn America-hating liberals want to prevent their country from re-becoming a nation where constitutional rights prevail and individuals are free to engage in outright warfare with each other.

Hatfield was an American who knew right from wrong, loved the constitution and took the bull by the horse, converting that union loving pussy Testerman's silly liberal (jew)elry store into a God-fearing gunshop.

Quote:

On August 30, Governor Morgan appointed Colonel William Eubanks of the West Virginia National Guard to command the government and volunteer forces confronting the miners. Sporadic gun battles continued for a week, with the miners at one time nearly breaking through to the town of Logan and their target destinations, the non-unionized counties to the south, Logan and Mingo. Up to 30 deaths were reported by Chafin's side and 50–100 on the union miners' side, with hundreds more injured or wounded.

Quote:

By September 2, federal troops arrived. Realizing he would lose a lot of good miners if the battle continued with the military, union leader Bill Blizzard passed the word for the miners to start heading home the following day. Miners fearing jail and confiscation of their guns found clever ways to hide rifles and hand guns in the woods before leaving Logan County.

Fucking federal over-reach.

Well, there you have it. One of the great, inspiring stories of a better time in a better America. We need to bring a return to those times.

The first step will be ensuring that every good American is armed, then ending federalization of the states, followed by an end to those damn liberal unions.

[Dragan]

Live reporting on TV as follows:

The following text was displayed on screen during the shooting: "deadly shooting in Florida: at least 14 injured."

Anyone see the issue with saying this? There were no deaths reported at the time they said this. There was no body count, so to speak...


Language matters when you're in the news business.

Reminded of Jordan Peterson, to paraphrase, "Everything I say, I say carefully, and well-thought out."

[Beyond Borders]

(02-15-2018 01:31 AM)GoingTheDistance Wrote:  

[...]
Thesis: White Americans have a problem with mass shootings because of single parent households, mental health issues and the media.

b]Conclusion: [/b]It's apparent that single parent households are a fucking disaster. That chart that I showed shows how much single parent households have increased in the USA over the past few generations. There are studies that show, as I cited earlier, that children are more likely to have mental illnesses in single parent and fatherless households.

Which makes it even more surprising that single parents are so celebrated in America, as if that's a good thing despite academic and scientific studies clearly showing otherwise.

It is my belief that that an increase in mass shootings among white Americans, if there is actually an increase, can partially be attributed to the result of (rapidly increasing) single parent households that cause mental illnesses in their children along with a rise in narcissism that leads to "media contagion" as that article that I posted stated.

On the individual level, white Americans can fix the fatherless households by trying to have a strong traditional nuclear family, despite all the obstacles that lay in our way in society right now. We can't really do anything about the "media contagion" with news station showing the shooters faces for a week straight and giving the shooters lots of attention. That's on the media, individuals can't do much about that.

While Google doesn't provide me with any sources that give a link between mental illness and mass shootings, my simple mind thinks that there is surely some type of link there.

Final Note: When somebody wants to debate you on guns, tell them to stop promoting fatherless families and encouraging the destruction of the traditional nuclear family.

Unless I missed it, none of your thesis explains why these three factors affect whites specifically in this particular way; after all, other races in America are exposed to the same three factors. You keep saying the words "white American" but not tying the "white" aspect into your explanation.

So let me add to what you've written by saying that white males are further disenfranchised, at least on a mental and emotional level, by single parenthood as opposed to non-whites because of their lack of culture. Other ethnic groups in America often band together without reprecussion and have more of a sense of group/tribal identity. Their males often run in very tight-knit groups, which may do questionable things at times but hold each other somewhat accountable and create the healthy sense of belonging that is imperative to the human mind, especially that of young males - and imperative to the process of them someday becoming normal older males as well.

Whites males often live more isolated lives. They're made to feel guilty of this type of tribal banding behavior, and in fact, have every aspect of their cultural identity being pulled apart thread by thread on an ongoing basis. Some are therefore left in a state of complete loneliness. Without guidance, constantly told their nature, and therefore the nature of mankind, is actually wicked and evil and meaningless. Since every person sees themselves as the star of life's story (the good guy), the demonization of the white male can only teach white males that mankind itself is demonic. After all, if I'm incapable of being just and good, what does that say about everyone else?

In other ethnic groups, such as with blacks and latinos, you'll find violence, to be sure. But it tends to be the type of violence normalized by some tribes within that race (for example, gangster culture). Not to minimize the effect of inner city violence on society, but while it may look deranged to outsiders, it is not necessarily deranged within the realities those people live in.

With whites, however, you have not only the removal of the family structure but often of any cultural structure and identity that might make up for it. And the end result, while still reserved to the outliers, is that on top of the growing rates of other types of violence you get the more deranged, outlandish form of violent outburst you see in a person who feels completely lost and alone and disgusted, and who wants to lash out at "being" itself. And within that framework, everything you've mentioned certainly contributes.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

Even the media statement of most mass shooters being white is just a misrepresentation of facts.

One could also say: Most criminals in South Africa are black! Most rapists in Thailand are Thai! Most mass murderers in Japan are Japanese!

You see the logic in it?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_p...phics.html

You have to take the ethnic representation among the population to find out whether a certain demographic is highly over-represented. (I might also add that some high-level mass shootings in the US in the recent years were clearly false flags, but that is beside the point.)

Quote:

Mass Shooters Aren’t Disproportionately White
Where the myth came from, and what it gets right and wrong about the demographics of mass killings.

Quote:

The myth began to spread in July 2012 after a 24-year-old white man, James Holmes, murdered 12 people in an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater. That summer, a team of researchers at Mother Jones put together a database of rampages in public settings. Among the 62 cases (and 64 total perpetrators) the team reviewed—instances dating back to 1982, in which at least four people had been killed in a public place—44 of the killers were white men and one was a white woman. In total, about 70 percent of the perpetrators in the database were white.
That figure didn’t get much notice until December 2012 when another white man, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, shot and killed 26 adults and children at an elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. At that point, more people started taking notice of these killers’ demographics. A week after the shooting, Stony Brook University sociologist Michael Kimmel and graduate student Cliff Leek wrote a blog post for the Huffington Post headlined “The Unbearable Whiteness of Suicide-Mass-Murder.

Quote:

What those initial Mother Jones numbers showed, though, was that white people weren’t overrepresented among mass shooters. The media outlet had found that roughly 70 percent of the shooters in mass killings were white—certainly a majority. But according to Census Bureau estimates for 2012, whites accounted for 73.9 percent of all Americans. (Keep in mind that the definition of whiteness is both vague and forever changing. In the 2010 census, the “white” category includes those whose families originate in Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa. Mother Jones, for its part, categorizes one Moroccan immigrant killer as “white”; leaves the race field blank for a Turkish immigrant; and describes several shooters of Pakistani, Palestinian, Afghan and Kuwaiti extraction as “other.”)

So there you have it - not only are Whites below their ethnic representation among mass shooters, the numbers themselves are probably false since at times Pakistanis and "White Hispanics" are also accounted as Whites.

So fuck you - the statement of Whites being the most numerous mass shooters in a white-dominated USA is about as correct as saying that Japanese are the most prolific mass murderers in Japan!

Even worse in the US - Asians and Blacks are demographically OVER-REPRESENTED AMONG MASS SHOOTERS!

Quote:

Since 2012, Mother Jones has added 29 more mass-shooting events to its database (and tweaked its definition of the crime to fit with new federal guidelines that placed the threshold at three victims instead of four). In this bigger data set, the proportion of white mass shooters drops down to 56 percent, by my count. Judging by those newer numbers, and the most current census estimate that 76.9 percent of Americans are white, the whites-are-overrepresented-among-mass-shooters meme appears even less accurate. Perpetrators that Mother Jones classifies as Asian make up 7.4 percent of the data set, versus an estimated 5.7 percent of the population, while those MoJo identifies as black represent 17.0 percent of the mass shooters in the database versus an estimated 13.3 percent of the population. According to this data set, then, Asians and black Americans are overrepresented among mass shooters by about the same proportion (a bit more than one-fourth) that whites are underrepresented. This means the population rate of mass shootings by whites (at least according to the tiny sample measured in the MoJo database) is 0.021 per 100,000 people, while the corresponding rate of mass shootings by blacks is 1.7 times higher, at 0.037.

Has anyone forgotten the recent drive-by shooting of that black man and his graphic videos of it? He is not alone.

Quote:

Overall murder rates among black Americans are 6.3 times higher than they are for whites, according to a report from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Another report suggests white offenders made up just 45.3 percent of everyone who committed homicides between 1980 and 2008.* In other words, white Americans may be somewhat underrepresented among mass shooters, but they’re even more underrepresented among all killers. In that limited sense, it would be fair to say that whites are responsible for more public massacres than you might expect. Does that mean their whiteness is a factor in these crimes?

Without going into the data I can easily make the claim that North Asians will be the least likely group for any kind of violent crime including mass shootings. Whites will follow and all other groups will be over-represented.

That recent guy counts for the Team Latino/Dreamer variety.

The only thing that I will likely admit for Whites and Asians going postal is that when they do, then they do it more effectively and are more deadly on an individual basis:

Quote:

But Lankford found some nuance in the data, particularly when it came to the most horrific massacres. According to the study, white and Asian mass murderers perpetrated crimes with more victims, on average, and they were more likely to carry out those crimes in public places. Nearly one-fourth of the white mass murderers and one-fifth of the Asians in the group engaged in public killings. Among the black mass murderers, this proportion was just 6 percent. Lankford suggests the relative whiteness of public killings, in particular, could indeed result from structural advantage and “aggrieved entitlement.” At the same time, he says, those public crimes get far more media coverage than any others—a factor that might reinforce the false belief that mass murder is a mostly white phenomenon.

The smarter a group, the more likely it will inflict more damage when it goes berserk - also logical here. I would be more concerned about a Japanese special forces commander with an IQ of 140 going mental than about a 68-IQ Somali.

[Leonard D Neubache]

Who gives a shit if whites are over-represented in mass shootings anyway.

I'll take my chances dodging the unicorn-level-rare white shooter rather than live in a wazone like Austin Chicago, thankyou very much.

Mass shootings are horrible, but here's Chicago's count for 2017.

Quote:

Shot & Killed: 625
Shot & Wounded: 2936
Total Shot: 3561
Total Homicides: 679

This is the equivalent of one of these 17-kill mass shootings happening literally every ten days, all year long. And that's just in one Democrat shithole.

Stay strong against the progressive agenda on guns, Americans. A fair response to anyone talking about gun control is to say "sorry, but too many people on your side of the debate have already made it clear that they want everyone like me dead. Not figuratively. Literally. I'll keep my guns, thankyou very much."

[britchard]

(02-14-2018 08:15 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Clearer version of Snapchat during shooting: https://www.liveleak.com/view?i=9ff_1518644376

Harrowing footage. Can't imagine how scared anyone would be at that point.

[GoingTheDistance]

The quoted texts are from Beyond Borders replies to my conclusion a few posts up.

Quote:

Unless I missed it, none of your thesis explains why these three factors affect whites in this particular way when other races in America are exposed to the same three factors.

I went with whites because the shooting that happened today was another white person (though he did have a Spanish surname, could've been a Spaniard), the majority of the mass shootings in the USA seem to be from white people (though again pretty proportional to our overall population in the USA) and because I'm white so I thought I would address it.

Really, what I found researching this was that it applies to males and not really just white males. Perhaps I should've written males instead, though I do think this is a big problem in the white community that we have as well.

Quote:

You keep saying the words "white American" but not tying the "white" aspect into your explanation.

Yeah again maybe I should've went with "males" since that's what my research showed. But again, whites do commit the majority of the mass shootings no matter how you define them, and I do think it's a problem in our community that needs to be addressed.

Quote:

So let me add to what you've written by saying that white males are further disenfranchised, at least on a mental and emotional level, by single parenthood as opposed to non-whites because of their lack of culture.

I never said white males were disenfranchised, I just think single households are a real problem in our communities that we can fix. The studies that I linked showed a correlation of mental illness to to fatherless and single household homes. That doesn't necessarily only pertain whites, as blacks have higher rates of single parent households, Asians less and I'm not sure about hispanics.

Also I never once mentioned anything about "lack of white culture". This is a problem that faces the USA, most of us white Americans are "mutts" so to speak and aren't only one European ethnicity. At the same time, we are not supposed to have a single white culture here in the USA that we can take pride in, even if we can trace two handfuls or more of European ethnicities in our ancestry.

Again, I need to stress that I never said anything about a lack of white culture.

Quote:

Other ethnic groups in America often band together without repercussion and have more of a sense of group/tribal identity - males often run in very tight-knit groups that may do questionable things at times but hold each other somewhat accountable and create the healthy sense of belonging that is imperative to the human mind, especially that of young males - and imperative to the process of them someday becoming normal older males.

Whites males often live more isolated lives. They're made to feel guilty of this type of tribal banding behavior, and in fact, have every aspect of their cultural identity being pulled apart thread by thread on an ongoing basis. Some are therefore left in a state of complete loneliness, without guidance, constantly told their nature, and therefore the nature of mankind, is actually wicked and evil and meaningless. Since every person sees themselves as the star of life's story, the demonization of the white male can only teach white males that mankind itself is demonic; if I'm incapable of being just, what does that say about everyone else?

I agree. I hear minorities say all the time "black Americans who descended from slaves don't know where they come from so they can take pride in their black culture". Ok, I agree with that.

But then the argument often comes back to, well, why are white Americans not only discouraged but actively ostracized from all walks of life in the USA (employment, education, politics, ext.) if we band together like other ethnic or racial groups in the USA do?

Minorities, including some on this forum, will say "nobody has a problem with taking pride or banding together over your Irish or German heritage." Ok, fair enough.

But what about the vast majority of Americans, who have lets say more then 6 combinations of different European ethnicities to our names? At what point does it start getting ridiculous to to have to choose between which of the two handfuls of European ethnicities white Americans have in them before we can simply say, It's ok to be white? Just white?

I agree with everything that you wrote that I just quoted. Though I never argued against those things in my thesis.

Quote:

In other ethnic groups, such as with blacks and latinos, you'll find violence, to be sure. But it tends to be the type of violence normalized by their tribe or culture. Not to minimize the effect of that violence on society, but while it may look deranged, it is not deranged within the realities they live in.

I would argue that same violent culture exists within whites too. But yes, it's not part of the mainstream white American culture. The "acting white" phrase that black and hispanic Americans often use to mock other people from their same minority groups for doing good in society didn't come from nowhere.

Quote:

With whites, however, you have not only the removal of the family structure but often of any cultural structure that might make up for it, and the end result, while still reserved to the outliers, is the more deranged, outlandish form of violent outburst you see in a person who feels completely lost and alone and disgusted, and who wants to lash out at "being" itself.

I think this is a good addition to the conclusion that I came up with. The removal of
the family structure accompanied by a lack of cultural structure to make up for it has done a lot of harm in our communities. Though again, I think strong nuclear families would go a long way towards solving this issue.

[Beyond Borders]

^ I think you misread my post, Bud. I clearly stated, or at least thought I made it clear, that I wanted to add something on top of what you'd already said, not pick apart or argue with what you already said. Hence the confusion in several parts where you felt I was putting words in your mouth. My entire post was meant to be an addition to the argument you'd already made.

[GoingTheDistance]

I can't figure out this format when it comes to quoting, I apologize. The quote below is what Zelscorpion said a couple of posts up:

Quote:

So fuck you - the statement of Whites being the most numerous mass shooters in a white-dominated USA is about as correct as saying that Japanese are the most prolific mass murderers in Japan!

I assume you are talking to me when you say "So fuck you"? I understand I am new to the forum. I tried to write a well thought out response to this topic backed by data and credible sources.

Also I wrote in the introduction part of my original post in this thread:

Quote:

White Americans do seem to come out on top numerically in every study that I researched when it comes to committing the most mass shootings, though in those studies white Americans are not that far off from their proportion to the overall population at large.

I understand I am new to the forum. There's no need to say "So fuck you" to me.

[Richard Turpin]

(02-14-2018 07:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

My experience heading to the tail end of my 30s is that no matter how skilled my dialogue, no matter how close I was to a person as a friend, no matter how much evidence I brought to bear, no leftist I spoke to was ever persuaded to abandon their puerile belief systems.

It's now my belief that leftism is simply an ego-driven manifestation of teenage self-worship that some sufferers fail to recover from for decades or perhaps their entire lives.

If I wanted to I could credit myself with having "converted" a number of people but the truth of the matter is that everyone grows out of this phase in their life at their own speed.

Another more pertinent truth is that the second you start discussing politics with someone of an adversarial point of view you are by definition adopting a weak frame. You are appealing to them to believe you, which makes you the person saying "please", which in turn creates the sense that they are the powerful one, not you. This is the crippled mentality that has allowed women to dominate the political spectrum, the antithesis of which is the Trumpian titanium frame of being a winner, leaving losers behind and dragging female herd members along in record numbers because a shepherd doesn't negotiate with sheep, he just leads the way.

Leaders lead and the weak are left to negotiate. You can be smart, but if you're not wise enough to the ways of idiots then you will spend your time casting pearls before swine, providing statistics and references for hours while the other person thinks "why is this guy so desperate for my approval, he must be a loser, so do I want to throw in with a loser?".

The most powerful political results I've ever gotten from fence sitters is by calling leftists weak, pathetic, soft, needy, unmanly, gutless, delusional, jealous or any synonym of those concepts. I would feel worse about doing it if it weren't true.

10 years of watching conservative political failure and more personally wasting time trying to preach the sense of gun rights in this nation has taught me this the hard way. Negotiation is for intellectual and emotional equals. The rest you must lead with frame.

This reminds me of one of Jack Donovan's books where he says 'don't argue with strangers'. Either 'Becoming a Barbarian' or 'Sky Without Eagles'.

He essentially said that the word 'argument' originated from the ancient greeks (I think! can't find a link) to describe instances where people cared about those within their own tribe and in-group enough to want to take the time and effort to assist them in seeing reason. In other words, save arguments for your friends and those who are worth it! - not because you like disagreeing with them, but because they are important enough for you to want to help. I'm guessing because those within an in-group share enough common purpose that changing each others minds becomes possible as well! Wish I could find the exact quotes as he said it so much better than I can.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

(02-14-2018 07:22 PM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  

My experience heading to the tail end of my 30s is that no matter how skilled my dialogue, no matter how close I was to a person as a friend, no matter how much evidence I brought to bear, no leftist I spoke to was ever persuaded to abandon their puerile belief systems.

It's now my belief that leftism is simply an ego-driven manifestation of teenage self-worship that some sufferers fail to recover from for decades or perhaps their entire lives.

If I wanted to I could credit myself with having "converted" a number of people but the truth of the matter is that everyone grows out of this phase in their life at their own speed.

Another more pertinent truth is that the second you start discussing politics with someone of an adversarial point of view you are by definition adopting a weak frame. You are appealing to them to believe you, which makes you the person saying "please", which in turn creates the sense that they are the powerful one, not you. This is the crippled mentality that has allowed women to dominate the political spectrum, the antithesis of which is the Trumpian titanium frame of being a winner, leaving losers behind and dragging female herd members along in record numbers because a shepherd doesn't negotiate with sheep, he just leads the way.

Leaders lead and the weak are left to negotiate. You can be smart, but if you're not wise enough to the ways of idiots then you will spend your time casting pearls before swine, providing statistics and references for hours while the other person thinks "why is this guy so desperate for my approval, he must be a loser, so do I want to throw in with a loser?".

The most powerful political results I've ever gotten from fence sitters is by calling leftists weak, pathetic, soft, needy, unmanly, gutless, delusional, jealous or any synonym of those concepts. I would feel worse about doing it if it weren't true.

10 years of watching conservative political failure and more personally wasting time trying to preach the sense of gun rights in this nation has taught me this the hard way. Negotiation is for intellectual and emotional equals. The rest you must lead with frame.

This is very sad but very true.

[Simeon_Strangelight]

(02-15-2018 04:44 AM)GoingTheDistance Wrote:  

I can't figure out this format when it comes to quoting, I apologize. The quote below is what Zelscorpion said a couple of posts up:

Quote:

So fuck you - the statement of Whites being the most numerous mass shooters in a white-dominated USA is about as correct as saying that Japanese are the most prolific mass murderers in Japan!

I assume you are talking to me when you say "So fuck you"? I understand I am new to the forum. I tried to write a well thought out response to this topic backed by data and credible sources.

Also I wrote in the introduction part of my original post in this thread:

Quote:

White Americans do seem to come out on top numerically in every study that I researched when it comes to committing the most mass shootings, though in those studies white Americans are not that far off from their proportion to the overall population at large.

I understand I am new to the forum. There's no need to say "So fuck you" to me.

I did not even refer your post. The fuck-you was to the media. And I quoted studies which ranged from 70-46% of mass shooters. And you should not add body-counts. If we add terror-counts by ethnicity then Whites don't even come close.

Of course single motherhood needs to be tackled. But I would also add the psychotropics - many would need to be banned today as some have "murderous rage" as a side-effect. Take "murderous-rage"-side-effect drug for several years and then be raised by a single mother.

There are countries like Canada or Switzerland with access to even more firearms, but somehow I don't see as many mass shootings there at all. In Switzerland most 16yo boys could break into their fathers' military grade machine gun and go on a rampage of biblical proportions. He could even do it 200 feet away. But somehow this almost never happens, because Switzerland has a far more stable society.

You are just making the claim that it is a "White-People" problem when we pointed out that the group is not over-represented among mass shooters - it is only over-represented in body-count. And it is certainly over-represented in false flags done by the government. If you deduct all those, then I am sure the number is much lower than by most other tribes.