LogFAQs > #888717860

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	Richard Spencer is talking at the University of Florida on Thursday
Inviso 10/19/17 7:31:16 AM #94:	Jakyl25 posted... JetJaguar posted... Jakyl25 posted... Right. Like, someone reads Catcher in the Rye and decides to kill John Lennon, that's insanity because there's no logical connection. Nothing in Catcher advocates that. Mentally disturbed person regularly reads propaganda about the superiority of the white race and how brown and black people need to be put in their place, and then goes out and specifically kills a bunch of black people, that's not really "insane" from a clinical standpoint. His values are twisted but he understands what he's doing and we can trace the source of his logic. Fair enough. But I would still categorize the Pulse nightclub shooter as insane, and people act like that is a presumption not afforded to minority killers. The Dallas shooter can be insane and still be motivated by the words and actions of BLM. Same as Ishmael Brinsley. It's definitely a consistent way to look at things but I still feel like it's a misuse of the word "insane." Their brains were poisoned and their conclusions disturbed, but they all still occupied reality. The problem is that if the killer is a minority, yes, they're probably insane in some fashion. You'd have to be insane to commit mass murder. But if the killer is black, it's "he was associated with Black Lives Matter, so not only do we not need to talk about gun control, but we can also demonize that entire movement." If the killer is Muslim, it's "terrorism. Nothing else matters, it's terrorism." Or in the case of Pulse, there was a brief "who are liberals gonna support, the Muslim, or the gays he murdered?" until the side pushing that agenda realized they didn't care about either one and pretending to do so was harder than just attacking terrorism and not giving a shit about gays. Meanwhile, if the killer is white, it's always "he was mentally disturbed, this isn't a white thing, it's not a male thing, and we need to talk about mental health, NOT gun control." Or in Las Vegas, "he's a white, male, billionaire with no history of mental illness. We don't know how to hate him." (Fox News' words) --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso <cite>Inviso posted [p:888717860] in Richard Sp... [t:75891432]...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote><cite>JetJaguar posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Jakyl25 posted...</cite> <quote>Right. Like, someone reads Catcher in the Rye and decides to kill John Lennon, that's insanity because there's no logical connection. Nothing in Catcher advocates that. Mentally disturbed person regularly reads propaganda about the superiority of the white race and how brown and black people need to be put in their place, and then goes out and specifically kills a bunch of black people, that's not really "insane" from a clinical standpoint. His values are twisted but he understands what he's doing and we can trace the source of his logic.</quote> Fair enough. But I would still categorize the Pulse nightclub shooter as insane, and people act like that is a presumption not afforded to minority killers. The Dallas shooter can be insane and still be motivated by the words and actions of BLM. Same as Ishmael Brinsley.</quote> It's definitely a consistent way to look at things but I still feel like it's a misuse of the word "insane." Their brains were poisoned and their conclusions disturbed, but they all still occupied reality.</quote> The problem is that if the killer is a minority, yes, they're probably insane in some fashion. You'd have to be insane to commit mass murder. But if the killer is black, it's "he was associated with Black Lives Matter, so not only do we not need to talk about gun control, but we can also demonize that entire movement." If the killer is Muslim, it's "terrorism. Nothing else matters, it's terrorism." Or in the case of Pulse, there was a brief "who are liberals gonna support, the Muslim, or the gays he murdered?" until the side pushing that agenda realized they didn't care about either one and pretending to do so was harder than just attacking terrorism and not giving a shit about gays. Meanwhile, if the killer is white, it's always "he was mentally disturbed, this isn't a white thing, it's not a male thing, and we need to talk about mental health, NOT gun control." Or in Las Vegas, "he's a white, male, billionaire with no history of mental illness. We don't know how to hate him." (Fox News' words) --- Touch fuzzy. Get fuzzier. Inviso</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1