A Perspective on the Violence in Nashville

Author: coal

Posts

Total: 206
#31
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@bmdrocks21
Can you do me a favor and stop communicating with him. The only way to make him go away is to pretend he doesn't exist. I tried to get GP on board with this but he apparently has fun interacting with him. We need to take this stance with him and yes who have almost identical personalities
#32
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@IwantRooseveltagain

I assume you trust CNN. At the 2:00 mark they talk about how easy it is to 3D print and install a Glock switch. They show a now-deleted less than 3 minute video that discussed how to install them.
#33
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
Okie dokie. Already embarrassed him a few times over.

I feel like he is getting desperate, making far dumber claims than when he initially joined the site
#34
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
I’m not going to go away anymore than reality is going to go away. You can’t have your echo chamber you loser, at least not here on DART.
#35
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
That’s right, you listen to your wack job cohorts. Did you buy your Trump digital trading cards yet? Lol
#36
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,299
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I will stop interacting, sorry.
#37
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,299
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
I feel like he is getting desperate, making far dumber claims than when he initially joined the site
Yes, no need to kick a broken man.


#38
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@coal
So let’s take a step back: should medicated schizophrenics be allowed to own guns?
#39
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@Greyparrot
Yes, no need to kick a broken man
But it’s such good fun! And exercise!

#40
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,299
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@bmdrocks21
>:P
#41
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 5,159
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
-->
@bmdrocks21
So let’s take a step back: should medicated schizophrenics be allowed to own guns?
Lets take a step forward. Some percentage of MAGA { Trumpeteers } are mentally ill. Should we regulate their access to guns etc? Yes.

Same goes for some percentage of the mentally ill virtual rapists who repeatedly attempt to stick their nose into a pregnant womans bodily business, without her consent.

Same goes for mentally ill racists and those who verbally attack { threats } others for the gender identity etc.

Guns/bullets are the easiest way to kill people from a distance, ergo, less chance for people to have a chance to get away or fight someone close.

IwantRooseveltagain is some of the only sanity we have to defending ourselves from MAGA Trumpeteer cult here at DArt of which I believe are mentally deficit, and some of that is proven out by whether they encouraged the violent attack on USA capital. Some will admit the cheers for such others will hide in denial.
#42
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
I will stop interacting, sorry.
No you won’t. What else does a substitute teacher living in his mother’s house have to do?

#43
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,702
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@Greyparrot
@bmdrocks21
@PREZ-HILTON
Can you do me a favor and stop communicating with him.
As someone who's already begun to do the same, I back this idea.

To me, the problem is not the fact that he disagrees with me, but his conduct. I respect Double_R, Barney, and Oromagi because they come across as genuine to me. Roosevelt does not. It's easy to tell he doesn't argue in good faith.

He can't go 5 posts without some childish name-calling. When confronted, he tries to justify it with some ridiculous paternalistic argument. For whatever reason, he thinks telling us we should be "forced underground" and saying he will "continue to deride" us is "for our own good," and so we "should be thanking" him. He thinks that, since we are so full of shit, we should be insulted repeatedly so that his pushback makes us think about why we could be wrong.

Ignoring the fact that cult brainwashing tactics like that don't work without significant social pressure, and that they only succeed in stopping PUBLIC expression of beliefs (private expression increases, because people tend to respond to social censorship with disgust, pushing themselves toward the side being censored) when that condition for said social pressure is met, there's the elephant in the room: His assumption that we are wrong. 

It's already so proven in his mind that we are evil bigots that he won't debate us genuinely. As he's said in the past: "I don't debate bigots." However, this leads to a natural self-contradiction: He won't debate us to know what we're saying, but somehow, he knows that we hold bigoted beliefs.

I pointed this out to him once with a question that went something like, "How can you tell someone is a bigot when you won't even debate them?" His response was to C/P ONLY the "How can you tell someone is a bigot" part, and conveniently leave out the "when you won't even debate them" part. He essentially took half of my question out and altered the meaning of my rhetorical statement in doing so. He then responded by saying "by what they say and do." .... Yeah, no shit. My point was that since he refuses to debate people, he doesn't actually know what "they say and do."

But of course, he couldn't answer my question honestly. That would require him to trust that my question was genuine. After all, why would he *ever* think a question coming from a bigot is genuine? So instead, he must edit my question to circumvent some kind of trap he thinks I've set. This REPEATED lack in trust for the person across the aisle has ironically, created of him an ideologue so stubborn, childish, and ignorant, that at the end of the day, he's the only one that can't be trusted to argue in good faith.

I doubt ignoring him will make him go away, but I'm still going to ignore him on the grounds of his poor conduct, from the insults to the paranoid belief system he has that causes all of his bad faith arguing. If he wants to waste his time responding to me, here or elsewhere, he can be my guest. Until I see any change in how he argues, I will not waste my time on him.
#44
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Mharman
he tries to justify it with some ridiculous paternalistic argument. For whatever reason, he thinks telling us we should be "forced underground" and saying he will "continue to deride" us is "for our own good," and so we "should be thanking" him. He thinks that, since we are so full of shit, we should be insulted repeatedly so that his pushback makes us think about why we could be wrong. 
Not full of shit - stupid. You guys are stupid. And you need to know you’re stupid, for your own good.

#45
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
Okie dokie. Already embarrassed him a few times over.
That's why. He repeatedly is embarrassed and he doesn't adjust his arguments, because he isn't a legitimate actor but a troll. He might even be a right wing extremist making fun of the views of low IQ left wing idiots instead of sharing the views of a high IQ left wing person
#46
PREZ-HILTON
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 2,806
3
4
9
PREZ-HILTON's avatar
PREZ-HILTON
3
4
9
-->
@Mharman
I pointed this out to him once with a question that went something like, "How can you tell someone is a bigot when you won't even debate them?" His response was to C/P ONLY the "How can you tell someone is a bigot" part, and conveniently leave out the "when you won't even debate them" part. He essentially took half of my question out and altered the meaning of my rhetorical statement in doing so. He then responded by saying "by what they say and do." .... Yeah, no shit. My point was that since he refuses to debate people, he doesn't actually know what "they say and do.
I agree with pretty much the whole of what you said and hopefully we'll be able to use the new COC as a weapon against this kind of bad actor. Speaking of which. Please vote on the new meep
#47
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Mharman
He won't debate us to know what we're saying, but somehow, he knows that we hold bigoted beliefs.
Well dummy, I know what you are saying by reading your posts. That’s like saying you don’t know what the author of an article is thinking unless you have the opportunity to converse with them. When somebody tells you they are stupid ( with the things they say) believe them.

#48
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
-->
@bmdrocks21
I guess I’ll go buy a 6 trillion round clip and full auto short barreled rifle from the local gun vending machine

sounds like cyberpunk
#49
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,299
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Mharman
Agree, I will join your pledge. When shame fails, shunning is necessary.
#50
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,702
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
I'll read it later. The thing is, we have a whole thread that sets etiquette expectations for this forum. If even some of those expectations are held up by the COC (and why wouldn't they be, at least the ones with regard to insults and misquoting?), then he should've been actioned a long time ago.

From the thread:
Formatting Best Practices:
For actual debates, I highly suggest referencing the guide. However, for general forum use, just obey a few simple guidelines:
  1. Space between things is useful if you wish to be legible
  2. Don’t bold and/or CAPITALIZE all of your text
  3. Don’t misquote other users
As I've bolded and underlined, #3 is key. The example I gave isn't the only time he's misquoted me, and I'm sure he's done this to plenty of others as well.

Response to mind reading:
  • Borderline: “I didn’t know you have super powers to know what I was thinking! What’s it like to be a superhero?”
    Sarcasm is usually warranted, and as an isolated case it does not cross the line into excessive trolling.
  • Delinquent: “Oh yeah? You’re a Nazi!”
    Accusing someone of direct involvement with genocide, is almost never warranted.
On this site, this dude is the king of calling people Nazis, bigots, and the like. He can't even make the defense that he has a reason to believe we are such, since as he's admitted, he won't debate us.

There are three types of trolls (or with vulgarity):
  1. Clowns who are not necessarily trying to inspire anger.
  2. Losers with nothing better to do with their lives than try to anger strangers.
  3. Idiots who say things so stupid you mistake them for the Type 1 or Type 2, but they lack the mental facilities to do it intentionally.

So if engaging in comedy, please keep the following in mind:
  • Lots of people will see it, so try to make it more about entertaining the audience, rather than hurting anyone’s feelings.
  • Never forget Poe's Law. The one time a feminist talks in satire about how women are weakened by their right to vote, someone will mistake them for being serious.
  • Don’t do mindless insults. Just calling someone a retard makes you look uninspired. It’s much better to properly evaluate their logic, point out every flaw in it, and leave them being a mentally deficient the unspoken but only rational conclusion from the evidence.
  • Don’t stalk people. Their interactions on a different topic in a different thread, is not the time to bring up old dirt. Certainly never make threads calling them out by name.
I think "idiot" is a bit harsh for Roosevelt, but he's certainly childish and foolish, so I think he falls into category #3. And obviously, he's made more mindless insults than anyone I've seen on the site.

I do believe there should be some leeway with these etiquette expectations, but it's clear they should be enforced in this case, if possible. In nearly every flame war in this forum, Roosevelt is a common denominator. He repeatedly violates these expectations, and openly admits to doing so, with "for your own good" being his best defense. It is such a weak defense. Rather than change his behavior, he continues to make it pretty clear that he's not going to change.
#51
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
you have to practically pay the mods to get them to do anything here, or make the wrong person unhappy. So its no surprise that people disregard most guidelines.
#52
Melcharaz
Melcharaz's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 780
2
5
8
Melcharaz's avatar
Melcharaz
2
5
8
just tell him God kills sinners with earthquakes, he blocked me over that.
#53
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
just tell him God kills sinners with earthquakes
Now this is a fine example of the brain power we get from the conservatives on this site.

#54
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,702
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@coal
Salvation is not had through policy. 
Bingo. We can fix some problems through policy, but the problems behind the problems can only be solved with cultural improvements.

How many of these shooters were raised poorly, or had some kind of traumatic experience in their past? I suspect it’s almost all of them. Not defending those evil people, but it’s clear that there’s more going on with them than the sheer moral depravity required to shoot up a school.
#55
Mharman
Mharman's avatar
Debates: 23
Posts: 5,702
3
6
10
Mharman's avatar
Mharman
3
6
10
-->
@RationalMadman
And that is why gun bans is actually what to push for but it seems enough Americans will let their children be slaughtered, literally not metaphorically and not hyperbole, before daring to push for that... So, America is fucked.
I'm going to disagree with this on the basis that, while horrible, these events are too rare to justify stripping away the people's right to defend themselves, be it an intruder or a tyrannical government.

A government that disarms its people can do more harm and shed more blood than any of these shooters can.
#56
IwantRooseveltagain
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,597
3
3
6
IwantRooseveltagain's avatar
IwantRooseveltagain
3
3
6
-->
@Mharman
A government that disarms its people can do more harm and shed more blood than any of these shooters can.

The people definitely need guns in case of a guy like Trump and his followers. But we don’t need assault weapons to guard against this. Ordinary weapons with a 10 round magazine will do just fine.
Topic's author
#57
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@bmdrocks21
The category of "schizophrenics" whether "medicated" or not is not relevant to the issue of whether people deserve constitutional rights. 

Creating categories of people who do not get constitutional rights is a dangerous path.  

First, you're giving the government the power to identify categories of people that can be stripped of constitutional rights. 

Second, you're giving the government the power to create categories, define their bounds, and enforce that alienation of essential liberty. 

Third, the particular category you've defined is one that requires something approximating "expertise" to evaluate.  Do you want government shrinks telling you whether you're sane enough to have the same rights before God and man as everyone else?  

Maybe today, things go as planned.  But twenty years later?  That thought alone should give you pause, given what you know happened after George Bush signed the Patriot Act and the so-called "war" on terror.

Our response to crisis should never start with giving the government more power.  Much less giving it the power to create lists of people they can strip of constitutional rights according to the determinations of "experts" of any kind.  
Topic's author
#58
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@ebuc
IwantRooseveltagain is some of the only sanity we have to defending ourselves from MAGA Trumpeteer cult 

Are you being sarcastic?  I have to wonder, in the face of such a stupid response. 
Topic's author
#59
coal
coal's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 1,950
3
3
9
coal's avatar
coal
3
3
9
-->
@Mharman
Bingo. We can fix some problems through policy, but the problems behind the problems can only be solved with cultural improvements.

How many of these shooters were raised poorly, or had some kind of traumatic experience in their past? I suspect it’s almost all of them. Not defending those evil people, but it’s clear that there’s more going on with them than the sheer moral depravity required to shoot up a school.
I view mass shootings as a reflection of our cultural decay.  Guns are not a new thing in this country.  If anything, they were once far more ubiquitous (per capita) than they are now.  But mass shootings are a new thing.  So what changed?  The culture decayed, of course.  I think it started with FDR and the progressives, frankly. 

Most of the mass shooters come from deeply troubled backgrounds.  But people with deeply troubled backgrounds aren't new, either.  The only thing that's changed is that almost all kids now either do not grow up in two-parent households, or if they do, both parents work.  

They grow up disconnected from their families and without a place in their communities. 

They get placed on lists, labeled, categorized, evaluated, diagnosed with behavioural problems,  pumped up with prescription drugs.  

When they go to school, they sit in prison-like "educational institutions" under fluorescent lights and forced to stay inside listening to shitty people (most teachers I think are pretty shitty people) drone on about shit the kids do not see the value of, for the purpose of performing on standardized tests that set the trajectory of their lives. 

When they come home, they eat processed food with no nutritional value, consume vapid media content (if not woke propaganda), and asynchronously interact with their friends (or bullied by their peers) through screens alone. 

They do not go to church, belong to institutions outside of those created by the state (e.g., school).

They are conditioned from birth to defer to authority.

I think if our social fabric was stronger, we'd have less mass shootings.  












#60
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,299
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
When they go to school, they sit in prison-like "educational institutions" under fluorescent lights and forced to stay inside listening to shitty people (most teachers I think are pretty shitty people) drone on about shit the kids do not see the value of, for the purpose of performing on standardized tests that set the trajectory of their lives. 
I would never do this to my high school students. If I'm not getting fistbumps and smiles all day, then there's something horribly wrong.

They grow up disconnected from their families and without a place in their communities,
They get placed on lists, labeled, categorized, evaluated, diagnosed with behavioural problems,  pumped up with prescription drugs.
Agree. There are a lot of kids I see void of spirit and drive, living in their phones, rarely smiling. That's not the ideal.

Most of the mass shooters come from deeply troubled backgrounds.  But people with deeply troubled backgrounds aren't new, either.  The only thing that's changed is that almost all kids now either do not grow up in two-parent households, or if they do, both parents work.
Thomas Sowell agrees.

I think it started with FDR and the progressives, frankly.
The FDR era was the beginning of the end of the concept of the privilege and responsibility of citizenship. FDR used the existing fabric of citizenship to draft men and employ women to  fight a foreign war 10,000 miles away as a means to justify a complete restructuring of the government where the government, not the citizen is responsible for maintaining the social fabric and the social welfare. The very concept that kept the Greek and Romans so prosperous for so long was destroyed within the reign of one president.