Current Events > Trump on mass shooters vs Trump on Islamic terror attacks

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://goo.gl/3NehF4

After the Las Vegas shooting by a white American, the US president avoided making policy announcements about gun control or criticising organisations like the NRA. After the New York truck attack by a suspected Muslim foreigner, there was no such hesitation

Muslims
I have just ordered Homeland Security to step up our already Extreme Vetting Program. Being politically correct is fine, but not for this!

White guy:
...Americans do what we do best: we pull together. We join hands. We lock arms and through the tears and the sadness, we stand strong...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DN8Bhq8XcAAJncb.jpg

Not that anyone is surprised.
---

pinky0926 posted...

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DN8Bhq8XcAAJncb.jpg

Lol, that's pretty interesting. Though, it is important to note that they are actually usually different circumstances.

But it's interesting how the left word cloud is so avoidance like and the right word cloud is so approach like. You get the indication that it's not simply political motivation but also a feeling of helplessness with one situation and not so much on the right. Perhaps because there's an easy target in the right.
---

No surprises here...
---

Lol he's such a good troll
---

It's also interesting to me how frequently, when the motives aren't attributable to things like terrorism, the supernatural label "evil" is used with a straight face. Watching CNN this morning, reporters and pundits have used the word 'evil' to describe the texas shooter several times now.
---

My god people still don't get the difference. You can keep out Muslims from dangerous countries that want to harm us but you can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment.

Come on guys this is simple.
---

COVxy posted...

Lol, that's pretty interesting. Though, it is important to note that they are actually usually different circumstances.

But it's interesting how the left is so avoidance like and the right is so approach like. You get the indication that it's not simply political motivation but also a feeling of helplessness with one situation and not so much on the right. Perhaps because there's an easy target in the right.

I think the right is equally avoidance-driven when it comes to white mass shooters, because suddenly all those hard hitting calls to action turn into thoughts and prayers.

The left is guilty of this too. Altogether too quick to show you how many Muslims are also grieving, as if to say "see, there's nothing to see here!"

It's telling where someone sits when they'll make those arguments. Easier to blame a faceless enemy than admit to any uncomfortable problem.

COVxy posted...

It's also interesting to me how frequently, when the motives aren't attributable to things like terrorism, the supernatural label "evil" is used with a straight face. Watching CNN this morning, reporters and pundits have used the word 'evil' to describe the texas shooter several times now.

Similarly, "mentally deranged" is the go-to for these mass shooters, because it allows you to dismiss any further examination of the situation and any potential solutions. Can't fight against mad men!
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

My god people still don't get the difference. You can keep out Muslims from dangerous countries that want to harm us but you can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment.

Come on guys this is simple.

Gosh it's so simple why didn't I think of that!

Maybe because it's not simple, because these Muslims you want to keep out are being radicalised on home soil anyway and because they're currently much less of a threat than white americans with guns. And also kind of the problem that you're very happy to defend the rights of people when it comes to their freedom to have a gun but not the rights of people when it comes to their freedom to live.

Maybe also because the last time we started putting widesweeping bans on ethno-religious groups it ended in the most devastating war on the planet.

Maybe also because it's strange that in the wake of an Islamic terror attack Trump has 14 different calls to action, but in the wake of a mass shooting Trump does not have one single suggestion on what to do about it. Not even a "maybe we should do something about all these mentally ill people who can't get treatment for their problems". Just a "sad event". It's gutless.
---

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.
---

Parts of me want to see his twitters if the Las Vegas shooter was taken alive, would he have demanded death sentence or not?
---

pinky0926 posted...

I think the right is equally avoidance-driven when it comes to white mass shooters, because suddenly all those hard hitting calls to action turn into thoughts and prayers.

The left is guilty of this too. Altogether too quick to show you how many Muslims are also grieving, as if to say "see, there's nothing to see here!"

It's telling where someone sits when they'll make those arguments. Easier to blame a faceless enemy than admit to any uncomfortable problem.

Oh, by left and right I mean left word cloud and right word cloud. That's a misunderstanding that I should've seen coming lmao.
---

COVxy posted...

pinky0926 posted...

I think the right is equally avoidance-driven when it comes to white mass shooters, because suddenly all those hard hitting calls to action turn into thoughts and prayers.

The left is guilty of this too. Altogether too quick to show you how many Muslims are also grieving, as if to say "see, there's nothing to see here!"

It's telling where someone sits when they'll make those arguments. Easier to blame a faceless enemy than admit to any uncomfortable problem.

Oh, by left and right I mean left word cloud and right word cloud. That's a misunderstanding that I should've seen coming lmao.

haha, oh
---

pinky0926 posted...

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

My god people still don't get the difference. You can keep out Muslims from dangerous countries that want to harm us but you can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment.

Come on guys this is simple.

Gosh it's so simple why didn't I think of that!

Maybe because it's not simple, because these Muslims you want to keep out are being radicalised on home soil anyway and because they're currently much less of a threat than white americans with guns. And also kind of the problem that you're very happy to defend the rights of people when it comes to their freedom to have a gun but not the rights of people when it comes to their freedom to live.

Maybe also because the last time we started putting widesweeping bans on ethno-religious groups it ended in the most devastating war on the planet.

Maybe also because it's strange that in the wake of an Islamic terror attack Trump has 14 different calls to action, but in the wake of a mass shooting Trump does not have one single suggestion on what to do about it. Not even a "maybe we should do something about all these mentally ill people who can't get treatment for their problems". Just a "sad event". It's gutless.

So pretty much when it comes to Muslims you're damned if you do damned if you don't. If you let more in then some radical ones come in as well and radicalize more, if you put up a ban then the ones already here get radicalized. Just like Europe less frequently. Islam is a problem ok, and nothing about it, absolutely nothing fits in with western values. I dare you to name a few compatible beliefs that are core beliefs.

And there's no such thing as a threat from white Americans with guns just like there's no threat from black Americans with guns. It's not a racial issue it's a cultural issue.

Also Trump can't do anything about guns because everytime someone tries it gets rejected. So why focus on something that you'll never achieve?
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

you can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527
---

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

True
---

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

That's a terrible oversimplification. Most of the time the situations are indeed different.
---

RebelElite791 posted...

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

you can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1819576527

@RebelElite791

What can be done? Besides mental health evaluations there's nothing we can do to stop people from buying guns due to the amendment. It's sucks it really does but any change that get's suggested ultimately fails everytime.
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

So pretty much when it comes to Muslims you're damned if you do damned if you don't. If you let more in then some radical ones come in as well and radicalize more, if you put up a ban then the ones already here get radicalized. Just like Europe less frequently. Islam is a problem ok and nothing about it, absolutely nothing fits in with western values. I dare you to name a few that are core beliefs.

And there's no such thing as a threat from white Americans with guns just like there's no threat from black Americans with guns. It's not a racial issue it's a cultural issue.

Also Trump can't do anything about guns because everytime someone tries it gets rejected. So why focus on something that you'll never achieve?

You're under the mistaken impression that I have no issue with Islam. I have a lot of criticism to make about Islam, Islamic terror and religious extremism in general. The point I'm making here is that at least when it comes to terror attacks some solutions are being presented and discussed by the president, whether you agree with them or not. He's taking a hard line and proposing what he plans to do about it. So why so soft on the currently much bigger problem of "deranged" mass shooters? Not even a single suggestion?

That's not curious to you? Since when did Trump pull punches or give up on something because it was hard? The guy wants to build a fucking wall the length of your country to deal with some Mexicans who's single biggest crime is not having a green card, but he can't even suggest a single idea on how to prevent or aid all these people dying every day?

It's definitely a big enough problem that something should be done. Not knowing what is hardly good enough.
---

It's really sad how people are really quick to dismiss shooters as mentally ill, but they never put up when it actually comes to addressing mental health issues.
---

I brought this exact thing up in the main topic yesterday and was accused of shit posting. I'm glad there are people that can see the blatant racism and hypocrisy of the divider in chief.
---

pinky0926 posted...

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

So pretty much when it comes to Muslims you're damned if you do damned if you don't. If you let more in then some radical ones come in as well and radicalize more, if you put up a ban then the ones already here get radicalized. Just like Europe less frequently. Islam is a problem ok and nothing about it, absolutely nothing fits in with western values. I dare you to name a few that are core beliefs.

And there's no such thing as a threat from white Americans with guns just like there's no threat from black Americans with guns. It's not a racial issue it's a cultural issue.

Also Trump can't do anything about guns because everytime someone tries it gets rejected. So why focus on something that you'll never achieve?

You're under the mistaken impression that I have no issue with Islam. I have a lot of criticism to make about Islam, Islamic terror and religious extremism in general. The point I'm making here is that at least when it comes to terror attacks some solutions are being presented and discussed by the president, whether you agree with them or not. He's taking a hard line and proposing what he plans to do about it. So why so soft on the currently much bigger problem of "deranged" mass shooters? Not even a single suggestion?

That's not curious to you? Since when did Trump pull punches or give up on something because it was hard? The guy wants to build a fucking wall the length of your country to deal with some Mexicans who's single biggest crime is not having a green card, but he can't even suggest a single idea on how to prevent or aid all these people dying every day?

It's definitely a big enough problem that something should be done. Not knowing what is hardly good enough.

Cuz NRA, that's why he's silent.
---

scar the 1 posted...

It's really sad how people are really quick to dismiss shooters as mentally ill, but they never put up when it actually comes to addressing mental health issues.

It's interesting that the mental health discussion has been called political on both sides of the aisle for different reasons, healthcare and gun rights.
---

@pinky0926

I'm not soft on mass shooters, i despise them. But my problem is that I've given up hope that we can change gun laws since they are protected by the 2nd amendment and unless we get of it, we're not going to see change. It's a sad thought that makes you sigh because you know there's a problem with no solution. I can't think of any way that we can stop these mass shootings from happening and i hate that thought

For your second point about why does Trump go hard against Islam but is softer on mass shooters.... i guess it's because one is an easy target and the other is not.

Hear me out. Enforcing a Muslim ban from dangerous countries is relatively easy to do for Trump and in turn will boost his approval ratings since he'll be seen as the tough leader who cares about protecting American lives from foreign threats. Going after guns on the other hand will lower his approval ratings and will ultimately fail just like it did for Obama. People will think he's un-American for trying to go after the 2nd amendment.

That's my 2 cents.
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

@pinky0926

I'm not soft on mass shooters, i despise them. But my problem is that I've given up hope that we can change gun laws since they are protected by the amendment and unless we get of it, we're not going to see change. It's a sad thought that makes you sigh because you know there's a problem with no solution. I can't think of any way that we can stop these mass shootings from happening and i hate that thought

For your second point about why does Trump go hard against Islamic but is softer on mass shooters.... i guess it's because one is an easy target and the other is not.

Hear me out. Enforcing a Muslim ban from dangerous countries is relatively easy to do for Trump and in turn will boost his approval ratings since he'll be seen as the tough leader who cares about American lives from foreign threats. Going after guns on the other hand will lower his approval ratings and will ultimately fail just like it did for Obama. People will think he's un-American for trying to go after the 2 amendment.

That's my 2 cents.

Most honest answer you could have given to be honest.

I think if Trump is going to blame these incidents on mental health, then he should be talking about doing something about mental health. If there was a big fuck up in my job and it kept happening and all I did was shrug my shoulders and say "well what can you do, clients are sometimes crazy" you can bet your ass I'd be fired.
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

@pinky0926

I'm not soft on mass shooters, i despise them. But my problem is that I've given up hope that we can change gun laws since they are protected by the 2nd amendment and unless we get of it, we're not going to see change. It's a sad thought that makes you sigh because you know there's a problem with no solution. I can't think of any way that we can stop these mass shootings from happening and i hate that thought

For your second point about why does Trump go hard against Islam but is softer on mass shooters.... i guess it's because one is an easy target and the other is not.

Hear me out. Enforcing a Muslim ban from dangerous countries is relatively easy to do for Trump and in turn will boost his approval ratings since he'll be seen as the tough leader who cares about American lives from foreign threats. Going after guns on the other hand will lower his approval ratings and will ultimately fail just like it did for Obama. People will think he's un-American for trying to go after the 2nd amendment.

That's my 2 cents.

This makes sense. But that doesnt make it right.
---

Gun control will not stop home-grown terrorists from killing Americans.

However, tougher immigration vetting will stop foreign terrorists from killing Americans.

So yes obviously the situations are different and therefore they way we talk about them will be different.
---

This is a Republican thing, not exclusively attributed to Trump
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Gun control will not stop home-grown terrorists from killing Americans.

However, tougher immigration vetting will stop foreign terrorists from killing Americans.

So yes obviously the situations are different and therefore they way we talk about them will be different.

Not even one suggestion from Trump, mal. No examination of the incident and what could have been done to prevent similar attacks in future. No call to address mental health issues, despite using "mental health" as the reason for the "sad event".

Saying "gun control won't help" is moving the goal posts here. How about even one suggestion on things the president could look at to curb this now painfully chronic social issue?
---

I'm not sure what to do about domestic terrorism. Banning guns is pretty much out of the question, and no one wants that. Maybe the short sighted do, but they may fail to realize the implication that could have. You'd have to alter/omit an amendment. If you do that, what impact would that have?

Gun regulation is a possible solution, but to what degree? Bolt action weapons only? No clips over 10 rounds? I'm just not sure.

I don't own a gun, and don't really want one. I have a curious 3 year old baby boy that I would hate to get a hold of it. However, I like that the option is there for me, if I so choose.
---

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

My only beef with this (as there are underlying truths here, but it is not so black and white as stated) is that they should be labelling everyone who commits a mass shooting/bombing as mentally disturbed. If you feel you wanna take a bunch of lives, you're not right in the head.
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

can't prevent a native born white American from accessing guns and using them due to the amendment

drats, if only there was some way we could change or update that
---

Eat More Beef posted...

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

My only beef with this (as there are underlying truths here, but it is not so black and white as stated) is that they should be labelling everyone who commits a mass shooting/bombing as mentally disturbed. If you feel you wanna take a bunch of lives, you're not right in the head.

It all comes down to motive. If somw middle eastern guy plows i to a crowd of people and screams allhu ackbar, hes more than limely doing it because je wants to spread terror.

If a black guy kills someone in a dope deal gone wrong or revenge for someone else getting shot. He's a gangbanger.

If a white guy just decided to light up a mall or school one day because his mom and dad beat him like a dog every day and neglected him. His brain is probably not all right.
---

RE_expert44 posted...

Eat More Beef posted...

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

My only beef with this (as there are underlying truths here, but it is not so black and white as stated) is that they should be labelling everyone who commits a mass shooting/bombing as mentally disturbed. If you feel you wanna take a bunch of lives, you're not right in the head.

It all comes down to motive. If somw middle eastern guy plows i to a crowd of people and screams allhu ackbar, hes more than limely doing it because je wants to spread terror.

If a black guy kills someone in a dope deal gone wrong or revenge for someone else getting shot. He's a gangbanger.

If a white guy just decided to light up a mall or school one day because his mom and dad beat him like a dog every day and neglected him. His brain is probably not all right.

I get that, but anyone that gravitates towards violence on a massive or extreme level is disturbed; you can be disturbed AND a terrorist too.
---

twitterfriends posted...

This is a Republican thing, not exclusively attributed to Trump

---

Eat More Beef posted...

RE_expert44 posted...

Eat More Beef posted...

Ma1ikii posted...

Terrorist = Middle Eastern
Thug = Black & Latino (BLM Supporter = Black)
Mentally Disturbed Lone Wolf = White

That's how it always goes.

My only beef with this (as there are underlying truths here, but it is not so black and white as stated) is that they should be labelling everyone who commits a mass shooting/bombing as mentally disturbed. If you feel you wanna take a bunch of lives, you're not right in the head.

It all comes down to motive. If somw middle eastern guy plows i to a crowd of people and screams allhu ackbar, hes more than limely doing it because je wants to spread terror.

If a black guy kills someone in a dope deal gone wrong or revenge for someone else getting shot. He's a gangbanger.

If a white guy just decided to light up a mall or school one day because his mom and dad beat him like a dog every day and neglected him. His brain is probably not all right.

I get that, but anyone that gravitates towards violence on a massive or extreme level is disturbed; you can be disturbed AND a terrorist too.

Another issue is that in the military, people literally train to take a bunch of lives. That comes awfully close to what you want to classify as mentally disturbed, and that's a problem.
---

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

@pinky0926

I'm not soft on mass shooters, i despise them. But my problem is that I've given up hope that we can change gun laws since they are protected by the 2nd amendment and unless we get of it, we're not going to see change. It's a sad thought that makes you sigh because you know there's a problem with no solution. I can't think of any way that we can stop these mass shootings from happening and i hate that thought

For your second point about why does Trump go hard against Islam but is softer on mass shooters.... i guess it's because one is an easy target and the other is not.

Hear me out. Enforcing a Muslim ban from dangerous countries is relatively easy to do for Trump and in turn will boost his approval ratings since he'll be seen as the tough leader who cares about protecting American lives from foreign threats. Going after guns on the other hand will lower his approval ratings and will ultimately fail just like it did for Obama. People will think he's un-American for trying to go after the 2nd amendment.

That's my 2 cents.

I don't necessarily think a president deciding to invoke and enforce a ban against people of a religion is something that should be celebrated or praised. I understand that you specificy that you are talking about ones from dangerous countries, but it's still drastic and I'm sure many would see it as "unamerican."

Similar to how you're holding such ideals about the second amendment, some people hold strong ideals about issues like this.
---

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.
---

GuyCarlPeterson posted...

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.

Skin color
---

pinky0926 posted...

Maybe because it's not simple

Yeah. It is.
People who aren't here yet, can be prevented from coming here.

NINExATExSEVEN posted...

I can't think of any way that we can stop these mass shootings from happening and i hate that thought

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1820163660
---

1NfamousACE_2 posted...

GuyCarlPeterson posted...

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.

Skin color

Probably not. There are plenty of white people who are trying to become Islamic terrorists.
---

Questionmarktarius posted...

pinky0926 posted...

Maybe because it's not simple

Yeah. It is.
People who aren't here yet, can be prevented from coming here.

And that Church shooter can't be prevented.
---

1NfamousACE_2 posted...

GuyCarlPeterson posted...

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.

Skin color

no, not always. there are muslims of all colors

You guys are missing the point.
With these mass shootings, they always use harmful code words.

When a Middle Easterner commits a mass murder, the media calls them a terrorist and people start associating Middle Easterners with terrorism.
When a Black person or a Latino commits a mass murder, the media calls them thugs (and if one of the victims was in law enforcement, a BLM supporter) and people start associating Blacks and Latinos with thuggery. (Or start associating BLM with terrorism)

But when a White person commits a mass murder, the media does its best to humanize the culprit, and doubles down on the possible "mental illness" aspect of it. How many times have you seem them talk about the culprit like "he was quiet, reserved, sometimes nice, always kept to himself, he volunteered at so&so, he did this&that, etc.?" And they also make sure to emphasize that the culprit acted alone, so that no one can associate White people with terrorism. And they shy away from talking about gun laws and stuff when it comes to White culprits, but have lots to say when the culprit isn't White.

I'm just saying we should treat all the culprits with the same disdain/sympathy. If you're gonna demonize/humanize one, do it for all of them, don't pick and choose, cause at the end of the day, all of them murdered several people with insane reasoning, so they're all basically the same.
---

GuyCarlPeterson posted...

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.

Mass shootings have such a comprehensive M.O. at this point that I could throw out some guesses at what the next one will look like:

- young to middling white man
- loner, social outcast
- mental health issues like depression and sociopathy
- domestic violence issues and troubled background
- obsession with guns
- black tactical gear
- ar-15s
- rambling social media rants and manifestos
- suicide after the event
---

Ma1ikii posted...

You guys are missing the point.
With these mass shootings, they always use harmful code words.

When a Middle Easterner commits a mass murder, the media calls them a terrorist and people start associating Middle Easterners with terrorism.
When a Black person or a Latino commits a mass murder, the media calls them thugs (and if one of the victims was in law enforcement, a BLM supporter) and people start associating Blacks and Latinos with thuggery. (Or start associating BLM with terrorism)

But when a White person commits a mass murder, the media does its best to humanize the culprit, and doubles down on the possible "mental illness" aspect of it. How many times have you seem them talk about the culprit like "he was quiet, reserved, sometimes nice, always kept to himself, he volunteered at so&so, he did this&that, etc.?" And they also make sure to emphasize that the culprit acted alone, so that no one can associate White people with terrorism. And they shy away from talking about gun laws and stuff when it comes to White culprits, but have lots to say when the culprit isn't White.

I'm just saying we should treat all the culprits with the same disdain/sympathy. If you're gonna demonize/humanize one, do it for all of them, don't pick and choose, cause at the end of the day, all of them murdered several people with insane reasoning, so they're all basically the same.

No, everybody gets the point. The issue is that the point is so obviously flawed and partisan.
---

Fam_Fam posted...

1NfamousACE_2 posted...

GuyCarlPeterson posted...

Islamic terrorists attacks have something in common. I will let you figure out what.

Skin color

no, not always. there are muslims of all colors

I know but when the killer has a Muslim name, he's painted as a terrorist from the beginning.

When he's white, he's a lone wolf and has mental issues.
---

COVxy posted...

No, everybody gets the point. The issue is that the point is so obviously flawed and partisan.

Your comment makes me think of a typical mindset people within quantitative research have. I'm not saying that it's necessarily applicable here, but I'd like for you to comment anyway.
So the mindset I often see is that conclusions from soft/social sciences based on qualitative research - similar to the post you're responding to - often get dismissed just because they are qualitative. Essentially, data is the only worthwhile evidence. Do you know what I'm talking about? How do you stand on that issue?
---

scar the 1 posted...

COVxy posted...

No, everybody gets the point. The issue is that the point is so obviously flawed and partisan.

Your comment makes me think of a typical mindset people within quantitative research have. I'm not saying that it's necessarily applicable here, but I'd like for you to comment anyway.
So the mindset I often see is that conclusions from soft/social sciences based on qualitative research - similar to the post you're responding to - often get dismissed just because they are qualitative. Essentially, data is the only worthwhile evidence. Do you know what I'm talking about? How do you stand on that issue?

IIRC CoVxy is literally doing a phd in psychology so this should be interesting
---

pinky0926 posted...

psychology

lololol