(November 6, 2017 at 10:11 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 6, 2017 at 10:07 am)Cyberman Wrote: It's not his alleged atheist persuasion that concerns me. It's the apparent claim to knowledge of his motivations for his crime.

Let's say that he did his terrible deeds because of hatred of religion and religious people. Does the attested fact that every atheist on this forum, and likely almost every atheist you might ask irl, condemn his actions not tell you anything?

Absolutely. And the same is true for many other groups as well.

(November 6, 2017 at 12:09 pm)wallym Wrote: "This is unacceptable, we need to do something" will be the refrain after any mass murder.  If you give all the background checks, and all the modification requirements, and whatever else you want, there will still be a mass murder, and the response will never be "This is acceptable, nothing we can do."  

The NRA is smart enough to recognize this.  It's not a battle over gun rights, it's a war.  If it were an issue of background checks, and that was going to end the debate, I'd bet the NRA would happily concede the point.  But that's not how it will work.  Because every event will result in another call to do something forever until guns are illegal.

(November 6, 2017 at 12:09 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote:

(November 6, 2017 at 10:11 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Absolutely. And the same is true for many other groups as well.

My post was specifically about the rhetoric used by the shooter. Sounds exactly like the kind of things some people say on this forum. Personally, I do not believe "hate speech" is a legitimate category; however, there are very many people on AF who will claim that similar speech directed towards gays and minorities encourage this kind of violence. If that is, the case, then those people should be concerned about extreme expressions of religious bigotry...exactly the kind that has been directed towards C/L in this thread.

Quote:how would it look like if the west was Islamic instead? I imagine a very different media, a very different views, a very different headlines, a very different "standard" for terrorism.

(November 6, 2017 at 12:09 pm)wallym Wrote: "This is unacceptable, we need to do something" will be the refrain after any mass murder.  If you give all the background checks, and all the modification requirements, and whatever else you want, there will still be a mass murder, and the response will never be "This is acceptable, nothing we can do."  

The NRA is smart enough to recognize this.  It's not a battle over gun rights, it's a war.  If it were an issue of background checks, and that was going to end the debate, I'd bet the NRA would happily concede the point.  But that's not how it will work.  Because every event will result in another call to do something forever until guns are illegal.

(November 6, 2017 at 12:15 pm)Aroura Wrote:

(November 6, 2017 at 12:09 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: My post was specifically about the rhetoric used by the shooter. Sounds exactly like the kind of things some people say on this forum. Personally, I do not believe "hate speech" is a legitimate category; however, there are very many people on AF who will claim that similar speech directed towards gays and minorities encourage this kind of violence. If that is, the case, then those people should be concerned about extreme expressions of religious bigotry...exactly the kind that has been directed towards C/L in this thread.

What rhetoric?  I have yet to see you provide a link for your claim.  Again, what we see being reported is that he was a bible study teachers aide.  

(November 6, 2017 at 9:46 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 6, 2017 at 9:42 am)Aroura Wrote: He was court marshaled and received a dishonorable discharge from the air force based on charges he abused his wife and child.
His in-laws were members of the church in question. Not present that morning, however.

No motive has been officially announced, and may never be, but I think revenge on those he saw at fault for his dishonorable discharge seems possible, even likely.

If that's the case, he's a real coward for taking revenge on the military by killing children in a church. I would have loved to see him try that against actual military members at a military facility.

(November 6, 2017 at 11:16 am)Gawdzilla Sama Wrote: The word I'm seeing is that he had issues with his former in-laws, none of whom were actually at the church that morning. That puts us into the "frustration kills" zone.