Well, this is a bit naive and unrealistic. Any news this big is GOING to have political implications. Possibly leading to decisions made in haste. Dream on. Take a lesson from 911.

skullaria wrote:
Well, this is a bit naive and unrealistic. Any news this big is GOING to have political implications. Possibly leading to decisions made in haste. Dream on. Take a lesson from 911.

Move to Whiny Bitchland if you don't like people trying to push back against the steady advance of Idiocy. Such resistance is both fitting and proper for the continuation of the species.

I'll stay and fight in the political battles. I'm sure many would love to see all the liberals MOVE.

skullaria wrote:
I'll stay and fight in the political battles. I'm sure many would love to see all the liberals MOVE.

Not being a liberal, I have to agree with Decius' post.

This is going to be used to remove even more freedoms from our society. The political wheels are in motion, [to "prevent" this type of "terrorism" from ever happening again...] whatever freedoms this may trample...

If that's something you can't stand behind, then I wasted my time serving our country, and being a contributing taxpayer in this Republic.

Sorry, hats off to Decius for spotting yet another disturbing trend in our [fucked up] political system.

Well, lose the I served my country stuff - You aren't the only one you know - I did TOO. In the military, and in civil service...for 20 years of my life. And yes, I paid taxes the whole time.

And not all liberals support gun control - it is almost funny how people immediately thought I was anti-gun control. I'm not. But that was totally beside the point of my post.

My point - I suspect grossly misunderstood - was that all political sides HAVE to engage - as soon as any one side advances an issue. It is going to happen - we cannot stop it.

IE - Right now there's some pushing for gun control. Those of us against that, HAVE to push back, and we have to do it NOW. Even if the timing is bad.

There are many sides to a political agenda- at least 2. Trying to keep freedom - from gun control, forced mental health screenings, forced medication of people not judged a danger to self or others - THAT is as much a politcal agenda as those that would seek to curtail rights that we all enjoy right now.

Which is why I think they have to happen. What would you have people do? All just shut up? Or just the people you don't agree with?

skullaria wrote:
Oh, I totally agree!
My point - probably grossly misunderstood - was that all political sides HAD to engage. IE - Right now there's some pushing for gun control. Those of us against that, HAVE to push back.

There are many sides to a political agenda. Trying to keep freedom - from gun control, forced mental health screenings, forced medication of people not judged a danger to self or others - THAT is as much a politcal agenda as those that would seek to curtail rights that we all enjoy right now.

Which is why I think they have to happen. What would you have people do? All just shut up? Or just one side shut up?

I'm not asking anyone to shut up, I believe in the freedoms that were set out by our forefathers, and I personally have no qualms about anyone speaking freely. Therefore, I think every voice should be heard, no matter how weak, or thin, and until that freedom is revoked (along with others) I will still continue to support our nation. I know that there are politicians who will try to use this tragedy to their ends, and they should be called out as the ambulance chasing charlatans that they are, in an openly public venue.

We need government that is FOR the people, not FOR the government. Otherwise, we become [not so] "great" Britain all over again.

That's my 2¢, YMMV.

dc0de wrote:

We need government that is FOR the people, not FOR the government. Otherwise, we become [not so] "great" Britain all over again.

That's my 2¢, YMMV.

Novel idea. Now get up against the wall, treasonous fucker.

skullaria wrote:
Well, this is a bit naive and unrealistic. Any news this big is GOING to have political implications. Possibly leading to decisions made in haste. Dream on. Take a lesson from 911.

True... Although I do agree that the context does make it somewhat inappropriate. Like two kids getting in trouble for fighting at a funeral... "Well, he started it!" doesn't mean anyone is in the right.

I also hate the types of BS correlations which are drawn in cases like this. Guns didn't make this guy kill people, writing dumb plays didn't do it, and neither did his manner or way of dressing. The simple fact is that he is crazy. Should we politicize that? Why not?

What made him crazy? I know a lot of crazy people. Some of them go crazy when they're too alone... while others go crazy when they're around too many people. Some of them go crazy while driving in traffic, and others go crazy when they haven't had enough medication, or had too much. Some people go crazy when picture frames are slightly to the left, while others may insist nothing should go to the right. Some believe that they are in the morally righteous no matter what they do, while others might believe that they are not allowed to do anything because everyone is against them.

What can we outlaw to stop crazy people? Hmmm... Let's make everything white. Infact, let's make everyone wear blindfolds so they are not disturbed by their environment. Why not just lock everyone in their rooms as well, removing any sharp objects. People don't need all the stress they have, no one should really work... well some. We need two sections of society, the authority and the people. The authority is never crazy. And if the people would just shut up, and listen to the authority, they wouldn't need to be crazy either. This will make society sane. Shootings like this will never happen again.

Yes, the timing is quite damned. But, if we don't discuss it, how do we prevent knee jerk reactions to the recent blow?

I've sat around a table of mental health professionals before - and had a very similar conversation when a judge asked for us to certify that a certain person would never hurt anyone if released to a supervised group home. That person had never hurt anyone or himself in the past, and had never been in legal hot water. Yet, no one can say for sure WHAT any other person will do, and that is the root of the matter.

It is true that this person I speak of is still incarcertated in the mental health system, having never committed any crime other than being a sexual deviant in his fantasies. (One who has never acted out against anyone in relation to that deviancy.)

It is a fact that there's a big trend to release certain people - mainly pedophiles - to the mental health system AFTER their legal imprisonment for any crime is over. Once they get in the mental health system, they can be kept there indefinitely.

And what of the move to force psychoactive medication on people and children against their will or that of their parents? Should that power of govt. be expanded? (Please, NO!)

If you can't predict violence with accuracy, how are you going to prevent it? Do we just take away more rights from a growing slices of population judged to be "weird?" Who is judging?

This is insane in itself! All this - he had signs - is retrospect. We might as well be looking at astrology charts.