It is a serious problem. But both sides of the political spectrum like to exploit various tragedies for political gain. Both sides tend to single out various groups as the problem. Truth is it is across the board in this country which makes it easy as hell to find examples whether it be white crime, black, Muslim, Christian, immigrants, citizens, tall people short people, ect. America is becoming more and more violent. From what I see on various sites, people, news agencies, politicians, most people only want to address part of the problem.
Okay, that face, that picture...I will have nightmares. I have to catch up on the hundreds of posts in this thread....he looks like an amazingly angry young man. Crazy expression.
Why do you so fear anyone examinong a possible connection between extremist politics and acts of mental illness?
I'll fill you in:
1. People are confidently claiming he's mentally ill, even though nobody here has the expertise or knowledge to make such an assessment in a serious manner.
2. His views on race can't be part of the discussion, I don't know why...
3. Some people are still not entirely sure he was racist, even though the guy is wearing the flags of countries who stopped existing because... you know.. people didn't like racism anymore.
Be ready, it's quite the ride. There are 3 kinds of people in this thread. Those who want him disassociated from the right, those who seek to associate him with the right, and those who are simply saying that it's too soon to know anything for sure.
Thanks for the synopsis. Do we have anything to indicate the answer to which of the 3 groups you mention at the end is right?
He looks nutz, that's for sure. But then again Ted Bundy was handsome, and he was nutz, so looks aren't everything. Is he American? WTF is his interest in Rhodesia? We have 2 Rhodesian Ridgebacks, and I dont' think my kids even know where Rhodesia is (was).
I'm sorry, I know I should read all 400 posts. He had a criminal record? For what?
Why does a boy from the US wear clothing that shows flags of Rhodesia?
I'll fill you in:
1. People are confidently claiming he's mentally ill, even though nobody here has the expertise or knowledge to make such an assessment in a serious manner.
2. His views on race can't be part of the discussion, I don't know why...
3. Some people are still not entirely sure he was racist, even though the guy is wearing the flags of countries who stopped existing because... you know.. people didn't like racism anymore.
Be ready, it's quite the ride. There are 3 kinds of people in this thread. Those who want him disassociated from the right, those who seek to associate him with the right, and those who are simply saying that it's too soon to know anything for sure.
I was wondering too. This article helps: Why would an American white supremacist be fond of Rhodesia? - CSMonitor.com
Seems to be a dog whistle for white supremacists. Was ruled at one time by a white racist.
Thanks for the synopsis. Do we have anything to indicate the answer to which of the 3 groups you mention at the end is right?
He looks nutz, that's for sure. But then again Ted Bundy was handsome, and he was nutz, so looks aren't everything. Is he American? WTF is his interest in Rhodesia? We have 2 Rhodesian Ridgebacks, and I dont' think my kids even know where Rhodesia is (was).
Given his apparent outlook on race, his interest in Rhodesia and South Africa isn't hard to fathom.
Wonder where the little **** got those views?
Good grief, I'll humor your trolling and weird obsession with me:
Consistently, officers reacted the same exact way in the overwhelming majority of arrests. Here is my contention:
the facts in these cases show that if police officers can respond without the suspect ending up dead in one scenario that it is possible to do it with others where the threat is nowhere near as high.
Some situational factors may increase the
chances that force of questionable legitimacy
will be used. For example, officers sometimes
use force on the slightest provocation follow-
ing a high-speed car chase, when adrenaline
levels are high. They may use force more fre-
quently when they are alone, because they
feel more vulnerable or believe that they can
get away with it. They may use force more
frequently as a way of emphasizing their
authority when suspects are disrespectful or when there is a hostile audience to the
encounter.
If the majority of police officers managed to resolve similar incidents the same way, how is it possible for others not to when the threat is not as high? Wait... there is more!
About 1 percent of people reporting con-
tacts with police indicated that officers
used force or threatened force. In the ma-
jority of those instances, respondents said
that their own actions, such as threatening
police or resisting arrest, may have pro-
voked officers.
This statement shows that there is really no difference in policies. Cops across the board (and as per the study) treat people in accordance to the state of the person. So how is it possible for my statement to be wrong if the policies for that treatment and their use is the same across the board?
Wonder where the little **** got those views?
My guess is the internet.
Apparently he spent allot of time in his room alonen
I'm just questioning you on your own posts - that's hardly trolling or obsessive.
But, Bravo! I'm glad to see that you're finally taking an interest in why different officers respond differently.
Possible, yes, but let's examine what the reports says about officers that use force. Quotations from the report.
That indicates that officers respond differently in different situations.
Yup, that is a common cause.
Mommy and Daddy were either involved or stupidly clueless.
Funny how right wingers love to say Muslims are threats yet more people in America have been killed by right wing attacks than Muslim extremists since 9/11. Condolences to the victims.
Yup, that is a common cause.
Mommy and Daddy were either involved or stupidly clueless.
Who knows? I'm sure we'll find out more. Could have been from his upbringing, could have been from the interwebs. Or both.
I have heard this before however events like this are only in the news for a few days and then everyone moves onto the next big story. It might not be to everyone's taste but I think this is the perfect time to bring up potential issues, while the fire is still hot.
Yup, that is a common cause.
Mommy and Daddy were either involved or stupidly clueless.
How is wanting to curb violence a "radical agenda"?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?