• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Maine Mass Shooter

Michael McMahon

Michael McMahon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 6, 2019
Messages
2,418
Reaction score
124
Location
Ireland
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
“Twenty people are feared dead after a shooting in the US state of Maine - with police continuing to hunt the gunman who is still on the loose…
Police have released images of a man with a military-style assault rifle in a bowling alley and say they are looking for "armed and dangerous" Robert Card.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/mass...-in-maine-with-gunman-still-at-large-12992832

Much like compensation culture in the court system for workplace accidents so too is there no limit to how much a capitalist in a gun zone could be compensated just for their life being endangered by guns were human life viewed as priceless. As such the high incomes of many CEOs can be circular where lots of luxurious recreation is needed just to recover from the threats of assassination. The mass shooting in Maine is a tragedy and exposes the risk of other mass shooters escaping without arrest.
 
Michael McMahon said:
Much like compensation culture in the court system for workplace accidents so too is there no limit to how much a capitalist in a gun zone could be compensated just for their life being endangered by guns were human life viewed as priceless.
Click to expand...

Actually, human life does have a price. About $5 million dollars, but I'm being deliberately vague. Sometimes the civil suit fails so the price is zero, but sometimes punitive damages are added so it's $50 million.

If you're making fun of ancap libertarians, I can play with that. Civil courts funded by a share of damages, would probably put a human life at $50 million or more, and since very few murderers could pay that much, they would also enforce slavery. Nothing says "liberty" better than court enforced slavery.
 
Nomad4Ever said:
What?
Click to expand...

To be honest, my own response was something of a non sequitur too.

Harsh reality sometimes invokes a radical response. Aren't we all tired of "we need more mental health treatment" and "we need more gun control" ..? Neither of those is likely to happen, so we're all helpless victims of mass murderers. They offend our sense of justice.

Killing sometimes seems justified. If your sister is raped, you might want to kill the rapist. If someone killed your sibling, you might want to kill them. The law serves to prevent such feuds from getting out of hand and causing many more murders than necessary for "justice."

It rightly offends us, when someone who was treated badly in school, or who had bad parenting, or who had an untreated mental illness, takes it upon themselves to murder multiple people who had nothing to do with their problem. It's hugely excessive, it's not explicable by urges of revenge or harsh justice. It's not something we can empathize with ... like most murders actually are. Even shooting your ex-partner because he/she is with someone else now, is more emotionally justifiable, than killing people at random.

Killing a shop assistant, in the course of an attempted robbery of the shop, is more justifiable. The culprit was tense and nervous, the shop assistant tried to duck behind the counter instead of putting their hands up. It's still profoundly wrong: like taking drugs, the offender should not have put themselves in that position if they didn't understand the risks that they might commit murder. They're 100% responsible, but still I say it is understandable. We can comprehend the motives (to get money) but also hold the perpetrator 100% responsible when their plan went wrong.

But mass murderers? Particularly those who kill strangers in multiple locations and keep shooting people until they're taken down? It makes no sense. There is no apparent motive except killing (and to say they're mentally ill is just stating the obvious.) We can't hold them 200% or 300% responsible, it just boggles the mind what would motivate a person to do that.

Mental health treatment might help after all. But it would need to start from a young age, because by the time someone is that far gone from rational self interest, they will resist treatment and might even kill the therapist. Crime in general can be considered a mental illness (it causes problems for the perpetrator of crime) so really we should concentrate our limited supply of mental health treatment on adolescents. That is where the problems begin, in the greatest crisis of most people's lives: the transition from being mostly obedient children, to being independent adults. Once they have formed their own character, they don't want help and it's practically impossible to reform them before they so something so stupendously stupid as murdering another person.
 
Michael McMahon said:
“Twenty people are feared dead after a shooting in the US state of Maine - with police continuing to hunt the gunman who is still on the loose…
Police have released images of a man with a military-style assault rifle in a bowling alley and say they are looking for "armed and dangerous" Robert Card.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/mass...-in-maine-with-gunman-still-at-large-12992832

Much like compensation culture in the court system for workplace accidents so too is there no limit to how much a capitalist in a gun zone could be compensated just for their life being endangered by guns were human life viewed as priceless. As such the high incomes of many CEOs can be circular where lots of luxurious recreation is needed just to recover from the threats of assassination. The mass shooting in Maine is a tragedy and exposes the risk of other mass shooters escaping without arrest.
Click to expand...
Another thursday in America...So sad
 
george48 said:
Another thursday in America...So sad
Click to expand...

Ireland lacks modern fighter jets and so for me foreign fighter jets often symbolise a yearning for omnipotence. The reality is that America lacks a competitor in conventional weaponry where trillion dollar overspending in the US military could have been redirected to make American infrastructure as good as oil rich Qatar. Americans are their own worst enemy! Foreign enemies are almost weaker in their anti-west ideologies to have attacked and unified Americans when Americans were more efficient at killing each other.

Live Free or Die Hard (4/5) Movie CLIP - Freeway Fighter (2007)
 
What American gun owners forget is that the collapse of colonial countries would have been unthinkable hundreds of years ago. The way the 1920s Irish War of Independence might have been so belated might have been because too many Irish people were intimidated by the might of the English empire in all other countries. Yet a truly impartial person might have thought it was inevitable in retrospect because English people simply didn’t love each enough to be burdened to gift each other with loot. Hence forgiveness can always be an absurdity when future Americans could glorify gun rights in their distant history without ever needing gun rights in the future era!
 
Loulit01 said:
This guy's still out there?
Click to expand...

News Alert: “Robert Card, the man accused of killing 18 people at a bowling alley and bar in Lewiston, Maine, has been found dead, four senior law enforcement officials tell NBC News. The shootings Wednesday set off a multistate manhunt for the 40-year-old Army reservist accused in the killings.”
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/live-blog/rcna122436

A dilemma with the left wing’s approach of disarming criminals is if everyone in the country were a criminal!
 
I need 20 rifles in case my house is robbed(!):

Naked gun 2 1/2 - Gun Assembly scene. OJ Simpson rooftop shootout
 
Just another one of the gop's "good guys with a gun"
 
99percenter said:
Just another one of the gop's "good guys with a gun"
Click to expand...

Shorter sports players like soccer’s Messi and tennis’s Ferrer who play full time can often defeat part time taller players because raw strength isn’t a substitute for time, physical flexibility and agility. Likewise owning a gun as a physically muscular person could still see you defeated by a physically weaker person who spent longer adapting to a specific gun.

There can always be ambiguity when someone whispers because people are distracted or in close distance to each other, feeling shy or sleepy or whether there was something too deep in their mouth as part of a verbal blowjob(!):

ASMR UP CLOSE Face Exam | Sticky Gloves & Personal Attention
A few months ago I went to the dentist only to be informed that 4 of my wisdom teeth were slightly decayed and had to be removed. There’s such normalisation of violence in society that I wasn’t sure if I should’ve consented to being knocked out as redemption for sadistic urges. With pornographic overconfidence I inquired if I could get a live operation without an anaesthetic but was told this would not be feasible. Then I decided a more blasé masculine approach would be to have a partial tooth removal where I could have a second operation another year if the teeth decayed further. Yet after a few days I thought it was actually kind of cool to have a few sideways teeth to fully confine the food being crunched. So perhaps I should keep the sharp fangs for a carnivorous vibe(!):
EFFFB7EB-045A-4794-AB9D-4CECE0D13FD9.jpeg
 
Last edited:
A circularity with mass shooters is that online gore is almost semi-legal meaning that it’s not fully knowable just how many more mass shooters or sniper assassins there’d be if the sadistic temptations of so many people weren’t already placated with real-life autopsies and fictional graphic horror porn. A big dilemma with misogyny is that men are culturally accustomed to be stoic during their own death whereas men are viewed as the protectors of their own sensitive women. Hence a big risk of misogynistic killers is that more women will be killed in revenge if the male relatives of the victims also convert to evil.


Actual brain autopsy of young naked woman on a gore shock site for those pretending that they want to become a doctor!


Human Centipede 2 - fictional barbed wire rape
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Rich2018 said:
But not "awful" enough to be a catalyst for meaningful gun control.
Click to expand...

If gun rights becomes an absolutist system then pantheistic versions of Christianity are capable of responding in kind. Firstly a Christian theocracy of gun control isn’t actually very evil if it’s a lesser evil where mass shooters are far worse than paedophile priests! Moreover materialistic theocracy could actually disprove an eternal supernatural afterlife because religious people would already be content with the material world as being transcendent to their spiritual belief system. For example Islamic countries can be so content with male chauvinism being legalised that they might not care as much about the promise of 72 virgins as a reward in an afterlife! Secondly communism as a system was responsible for huge amounts of evil in history but as an academic ideology isn’t as bad as it might appear if everyone were at risk of mass shooters in capitalist countries. For instance a Christian fundamentalist might be tempted to view Islam as potentially worse than communism not just because of the risk of Islamic jihadi terrorism but also because Islam claims to be perpetual as a faith were Islam viewed as an enemy whereas communism is limited by the potential boredom of materialism if communism were to be sustained over centuries. So a pluralistic Christian might be inclined to tolerate communist countries if Arabic countries were to be welcomed by Christianity only if communist war criminals were viewed as ancient and deceased much like the Christian crusades. The Cold War emphasised how evil communism could have been had communism launched first nuclear strikes to ambush the west but this is a counterfactual even though the threat alone was still very evil. Communism committed evil executions against landowners in history but like other forms of colonialism some of the victims might not have been as vigilant as they could have been. For example the upper and middle classes could always infiltrate poor people in communist countries the moment tensions flair because the poor outnumber them too greatly. So even though most people are unarmed in communist China the upper and middle classes could immediately surrender their wealth if communists threatened them to avoid the risk of being murdered. For example even in capitalist countries rich people can wear modest clothing to avoid being robbed by street thieves. So wealth in communist countries might be more of a recreational break away from being poor rather than as a form of identity. Thirdly people in gun zones don’t have to be armed even if they don’t personally care about control or the threat of gun assassins if the unarmed individuals rooted in being more relaxed and sociable than others which could be advantageous for getting employed if lots of other gun owners are too serious. I might use Keanu Reeves not as a John Wick assassin for this example but as a Christian exorcist(!):


Constantine (2005) - Burning in Hell scene (3/9)

“In the People's Republic of China, access by the general public to firearms is subject to some of the strictest control measures in the world. With the exception of individuals with hunting permits and some ethnic minorities, civilian firearm ownership is restricted to non-individual entities.
Law enforcement, military, paramilitary, and security personnel are allowed to use firearms. Police are to use issued pistols only to stop serious or dangerous crimes.
Airsoft guns are practically prohibited in China, as muzzle energy limits classify them as real firearms.” wiki
 
Last edited:
Gun control could look more epic if the Cold War wasn’t about capitalism but about gun control! The irony of gun owners claiming that gun control is a slippery slope to communism is that the comparison could risk creating a temptation for certain gun control people to tolerate communism when many gun control people could have been content with capitalism!


Phantom (2013) - Pick a Side (Ed Harris and William Fichtner)
 
Last edited:
An advantage of a handgun ban is that it deters machismo in duelling when duel distances can be preferential to certain physiques over others. The Republic of Ireland’s handgun ban might not have had many vocal supporters but had few opponents even from gun owners such that the legislation almost appeared passive. An ironic advantage of rifles is that by often being immoral in the ease of ambushes it means the victims don’t have to consent to being proven weaker. After all a fair fight might backfire if the stronger person isn’t as strong as the weapon used would imply when the luck of weaponry and the lack of second chances can be unrelated to unarmed combat. A handgun fight can be too personal:


Cold Mountain: Gunfight with the Home Guard
 
Michael McMahon said:
An advantage of a handgun ban is that it deters machismo in duelling when duel distances can be preferential to certain physiques over others. The Republic of Ireland’s handgun ban might not have had many vocal supporters but had few opponents even from gun owners such that the legislation almost appeared passive. An ironic advantage of rifles is that by often being immoral in the ease of ambushes it means the victims don’t have to consent to being proven weaker. After all a fair fight might backfire if the stronger person isn’t as strong as the weapon used would imply when the luck of weaponry and the lack of second chances can be unrelated to unarmed combat. A handgun fight can be too personal:


Cold Mountain: Gunfight with the Home Guard
Click to expand...


And an advantage of a sword ban, is that it prevents dueling with swords.
 
Rich2018 said:
And an advantage of a sword ban, is that it prevents dueling with swords.
Click to expand...

The court system doesn't depend on apologies because a judge's decision can begin at a proportional or equivalent high jail sentence with apologising taken into account afterwards with a reduced jail sentence. Hence leniency can be an active process of subtraction rather than it being a passive process of vengefulness being added on to a low starting sentence if there's no apology. In other words if there's enough precedence then vengefulness in court could be a passive process. So gun rights sometimes relies on a sense of provocation and indignation without realising that the perpetrators and vigilantes in court are never tortured into apologising! We forget parole and prisoner release can include remorseless people where they aren't confined in jails until they literally feel sorry.
 
Gun wounds symbolise vengefulness because the larger impact resembles a desecration of a dead body without the body literally being shot after the death has already occurred. So guns can symbolise the need to forgive vengefulness in a way that can be too addictive.
 
If most people weren’t gun owners but were still tolerant of gun owners then the unconscious minds of the tolerant unarmed people might actually be more emphatic than they ever consciously expected when gun ownership is that self-sacrificing. In other words many unarmed bystanders might accidentally be more vigilant even if they’re not capable of defending themselves too well in gun zones where their vigilance might almost resemble that required by a militia. As such a conversion from gun rights to gun control militias might actually be much easier than you’d imagine because the moment you so much as tolerate the concept of a militia then gun owners would resemble those who hate a militia for underachieving gun control even if gun owners didn’t actually care about a militia and only hated gun control. This misinterpretation of gun owners as militia idealists could immediately radicalise those who tolerated a militia into supporting the militia more exuberantly! After all both gun owners and militiamen share a trait of rebelliousness. A militia doesn’t require much unification in love when they could rely on hatred to acquire new members.
 
Last edited:
A limitation of using an argument of apathy that too many Americans don’t care about gun deaths isn’t sufficient for the impartial standard of science of not caring less when the material world simply isn’t conscious! Moreover the huge population size of America combined with decades of time makes predicting future public policies very tricky. So apathy simply isn’t quantifiable in a political system no matter how much everyone can grieve for victims. For example a limit of partial gun control is that fast and thin foot runners by sprinting to multiple vantage points and covering positions are capable of shooting far more unarmed people in a mass shooting than a large and muscular mass. For example the Norway mass shooter Breivik wasn’t very athletic in spite of the huge numbers killed. Gun permits could backfire if a racist regime blocked gun sales to an ethnic minority such as the Armenian genocide in early 1900s Turkey. Yet an ethnic minority can be so large that so long as they’d access to gun sales in the years beforehand then a sizeable number of individual ethnic members are capable of stocking up on guns as precaution no matter how long the waiting lists are. So the way NRA members often stock up on extra guns in fear of gun control forgets that a militia or gun club could do the same which can reduce the risks in creating a gun control system.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom