Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 27, 2015 6:28:19 GMT -5
Discuss among yourselves.
|
|
nathanhm
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by nathanhm on Aug 27, 2015 6:40:15 GMT -5
Targeted crime, but not a hate crime.
Anger directed at the TV station not white people.
|
|
Elvado
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,080
|
Post by Elvado on Aug 27, 2015 7:04:49 GMT -5
Early reports from manifesto indicate victim felt persecuted based upon race and sexuality. While there is certainly no need to classify the crime at this point, it does raise some questions.
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,158
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 27, 2015 7:23:29 GMT -5
Both.
From cnn.com quoting the manifesto: "But Flanagan also blamed much of his misery on black men and white women and said he was "somewhat racist against whites, blacks and Latinos."
He admired the shooters who massacred students at Columbine High School and at Virginia Tech, which lies about 25 miles away from Roanoke.
Flanagan said he put a deposit down for a gun two days after the Charleston, South Carolina, church shooting in June and ranted against the accused shooter.
"As for Dylann Roof? You (deleted)! You want a race war (deleted)? BRING IT THEN YOU WHITE (deleted)!!!" the fax said."
|
|
nathanhm
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,041
|
Post by nathanhm on Aug 27, 2015 8:17:23 GMT -5
Oh wow didn't hear about the manifesto, if that's what it says then sounds like a hate crime
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,573
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Aug 27, 2015 9:19:34 GMT -5
Colloquially (as opposed to legally), I think most people would apply the term to a crime where race, religion, or some other form of 'inherent identity' is the primary factor above all others. Perpetrators of such acts, like the aforementioned Mr. Roof, pick out victims as representatives of that identity group, without knowing them as individuals.
In this particular case, the perpetrator clearly knew and held grievances against the individuals he targeted, so it calls into question the applicability of the term. Clearly there was racial, sexual, class, and other resentment built into those grievances, but without diving into that morass, I think it's safe to say that he did not pick the targets at random based solely on their race. I would view it as akin to a bigoted white guy holding a set of grievances against his drug dealer and shooting him; racial animus probably played a role, but the pre-existing relationship and whatever went on there was the more important factor,
Now, it he had gone and killed two white people at random because he wanted to take Mr. Roof up on his offer of RaHoWa, then that would incontrovertibly be a hate crime as most people understand the term, even with the knowledge that this guy clearly had a lot of unaddressed mental health needs.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Aug 27, 2015 12:29:06 GMT -5
Colloquially (as opposed to legally), I think most people would apply the term to a crime where race, religion, or some other form of 'inherent identity' is the primary factor above all others. Perpetrators of such acts, like the aforementioned Mr. Roof, pick out victims as representatives of that identity group, without knowing them as individuals. In this particular case, the perpetrator clearly knew and held grievances against the individuals he targeted, so it calls into question the applicability of the term. Clearly there was racial, sexual, class, and other resentment built into those grievances, but without diving into that morass, I think it's safe to say that he did not pick the targets at random based solely on their race. I would view it as akin to a bigoted white guy holding a set of grievances against his drug dealer and shooting him; racial animus probably played a role, but the pre-existing relationship and whatever went on there was the more important factor, Now, it he had gone and killed two white people at random because he wanted to take Mr. Roof up on his offer of RaHoWa, then that would incontrovertibly be a hate crime as most people understand the term, even with the knowledge that this guy clearly had a lot of unaddressed mental health needs. Therein lies the problem of tossing about this nebulous concept of a "hate crime." At least this incident will give the White House another opportunity to falsely claim that gun violence is on the rise.
|
|
SirSaxa
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,620
|
Post by SirSaxa on Aug 27, 2015 13:54:11 GMT -5
At least this incident will give the White House another opportunity to falsely claim that gun violence is on the rise. Good point KC... only 100,000 people are shot in this country each year, and it's been that way forever. If we were seeing that rate go to 150K/yr or 200K/yr, then yeah - we could say gun violence is on the rise. Here are a few relevant stats, none of which indicate that gun violence "is on the rise": - Every year in the U.S., an average of more than 100,000 people are shot, according to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence.
- Every day in the U.S., an average of 289 people are shot. Eighty-six of them die: 30 are murdered, 53 kill themselves, two die accidentally, and one is shot in a police intervention, the Brady Campaign reports.
- Between 2000 and 2010, a total of 335,609 people died from guns -- more than the population of St. Louis, Mo. (318,069), Pittsburgh (307,484), Cincinnati, Ohio (296,223), and Orlando, Fla. (243,195) (sources: CDF, U.S. Census; CDC)
usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/16/16547690-just-the-facts-gun-violence-in-america?lite
also:
Gun Homicides (average annually): Less than 50: Japan Less than 150: Germany, Italy, France, etc. Less than 200: Canada More than 10,000: USA
Source: IANSA (International Action Network on Small Arms of the United Nations)
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Aug 27, 2015 13:58:54 GMT -5
At least this incident will give the White House another opportunity to falsely claim that gun violence is on the rise. Good point KC... only 100,000 people are shot in this country each year, and it's been that way forever. If we were seeing that rate go to 150K/yr or 200K/yr, then yeah - we could say gun violence is on the rise. Here are a few relevant stats, none of which indicate that gun violence "is on the rise": - Every year in the U.S., an average of more than 100,000 people are shot, according to The Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence.
- Every day in the U.S., an average of 289 people are shot. Eighty-six of them die: 30 are murdered, 53 kill themselves, two die accidentally, and one is shot in a police intervention, the Brady Campaign reports.
- Between 2000 and 2010, a total of 335,609 people died from guns -- more than the population of St. Louis, Mo. (318,069), Pittsburgh (307,484), Cincinnati, Ohio (296,223), and Orlando, Fla. (243,195) (sources: CDF, U.S. Census; CDC)
usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/16/16547690-just-the-facts-gun-violence-in-america?lite
also:
Gun Homicides (average annually): Less than 50: Japan Less than 150: Germany, Italy, France, etc. Less than 200: Canada More than 10,000: USA
Source: IANSA (International Action Network on Small Arms of the United Nations)
Except that gun violence rates have been declining. Significantly. But by all means, let us pass more regulations, like background checks. I bet a background check would've stopped the shooter yesterday.
|
|
quickplay
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 733
|
Post by quickplay on Aug 27, 2015 14:28:37 GMT -5
Gun Homicides (average annually): Less than 50: Japan Less than 150: Germany, Italy, France, etc. Less than 200: Canada More than 10,000: USA
Whatever your views on gun culture in the U.S. are, that's a pretty astounding statistic.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,839
|
Post by thebin on Aug 27, 2015 17:27:00 GMT -5
Australia used to have an almost identical gun culture as the US, complete with the historical frontier mythos that was once legitimate but outlived its age. Then they had a hideous massacre at Port Arthur and they decided that could not be allowed to happen again in a civilized country. So they acted - and I'm not talking about chicken$hit backround checks. The legislation was driven by conservative PM John Howard and was passed with universal support from all parties.
What happened? Statistically speaking gun violence disappeared overnight. That simple. I've not yet seen the NRA's talking points on the crushing gun violence comparrison btn US and a country that could not possibly be more similar to our own.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,702
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Aug 27, 2015 20:44:58 GMT -5
Australia used to have an almost identical gun culture as the US, complete with the historical frontier mythos that was once legitimate but outlived its age. Then they had a hideous massacre at Port Arthur and they decided that could not be allowed to happen again in a civilized country. So they acted - and I'm not talking about chicken$hit backround checks. The legislation was driven by conservative PM John Howard and was passed with universal support from all parties. And that's precisely why it won't happen in the US. Neither side has an interest in change because it's red meat to their followers. Who wants to be the Republican candidate who will push for making certain weapons illegal? Better yet, who wants to be the Democratic candidate who tells people the Second Amendment is not about "militias" and that gun ownership is an enumerated right? These are the candidates that never make it to 2016.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,839
|
Post by thebin on Aug 28, 2015 8:12:36 GMT -5
Australia used to have an almost identical gun culture as the US, complete with the historical frontier mythos that was once legitimate but outlived its age. Then they had a hideous massacre at Port Arthur and they decided that could not be allowed to happen again in a civilized country. So they acted - and I'm not talking about chicken$hit backround checks. The legislation was driven by conservative PM John Howard and was passed with universal support from all parties. And that's precisely why it won't happen in the US. Neither side has an interest in change because it's red meat to their followers. Who wants to be the Republican candidate who will push for making certain weapons illegal? Better yet, who wants to be the Democratic candidate who tells people the Second Amendment is not about "militias" and that gun ownership is an enumerated right? These are the candidates that never make it to 2016. You are correct of course. And yet it profoundly disturbs me that in the face of our own Dunblane or Port Arthur enough American people decided they still wanted their violent toys more than they care about children murdered with a legally purchased military-grade weapon. Newtown was a Port Arthur with the horrible distinction that all the murdered were babies. If that doesn't move the needle then what will? That the mouth breathers who continue to support the NRA think of themselves as "real Americans" is depressing enough without realizing that they represent the most foul inclinations of the great American culture. It doesn't escape me that these are the people who like to proclaim that America is the greatest and freest country in the world despite never having left North America and possessing at best a 4th grade knowledge of world history and geography.
|
|
deacon
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,850
|
Post by deacon on Aug 28, 2015 9:24:51 GMT -5
Oh wow didn't hear about the manifesto, if that's what it says then sounds like a hate crime If he killed two random white people just because they were white, this would be a hate crime. He apparently worked with/knew both of the victims and acted out in retaliation because of perceived slights in the workplace.
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Aug 28, 2015 10:53:00 GMT -5
And that's precisely why it won't happen in the US. Neither side has an interest in change because it's red meat to their followers. Who wants to be the Republican candidate who will push for making certain weapons illegal? Better yet, who wants to be the Democratic candidate who tells people the Second Amendment is not about "militias" and that gun ownership is an enumerated right? These are the candidates that never make it to 2016. You are correct of course. And yet it profoundly disturbs me that in the face of our own Dunblane or Port Arthur enough American people decided they still wanted their violent toys more than they care about children murdered with a legally purchased military-grade weapon. Newtown was a Port Arthur with the horrible distinction that all the murdered were babies. If that doesn't move the needle then what will? That the mouth breathers who continue to support the NRA think of themselves as "real Americans" is depressing enough without realizing that they represent the most foul inclinations of the great American culture. It doesn't escape me that these are the people who like to proclaim that America is the greatest and freest country in the world despite never having left North America and possessing at best a 4th grade knowledge of world history and geography. That you call them "mouth breathers" is such a elitist, coastal attitude, and shows you just don't get it. Resort to ad hominems all you want. That won't move the needle. BTW, the Aussie gun buy back only brought in 1/5 to 1/3 of the country's guns. You think that would happen here? That means the government is going to be buying more than 100M guns. No way that happens. The U.S. is fundamentally different than Australia, and every other country in the world. Even John Howard recognizes that fact:
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,839
|
Post by thebin on Aug 28, 2015 11:22:47 GMT -5
The kind of people who in the wake of Newtown rushed out to buy as many assault rifles and ammo as they could afford before the black helicopters came take away their arsenals and impose socialism on them are much worse than mouth breathers. I'm open to the possibility that in more rural America a responsible level of gun ownership in the form of shotguns and rifles for hunting and such is perfectly reasonable. But handguns are way too easy to procure and way too prevalent. And military grade assault rifles have ZERO place in civilian hands.
Incidentally I don't disagree with anything Howard said in your quote. He's right that the NRA is WAY TOO powerful. And I see no need to repeal the 2nd amendment. A reasonable interpretation could surely find that owning a shotgun after long waiting periods and intense background checks for hunting or clay shooting or emergency home defense was legal but stocking the house with AR-15s for weekend pretend warfare at the gun range was just not compelling enough to protect their legality in the face of the range of adverse consequences.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,839
|
Post by thebin on Aug 28, 2015 11:35:49 GMT -5
Here's Howard again:
""I don't come here with any lectures," he said. Australia started with a much lower gun death rate, he said, and "we don't have constitutional guarantees in relation to these things."
"However," he added, "that doesn't alter the fact that our murder rate using guns has fallen and there's not much doubt in my mind that it's the availability of guns that causes such a high rate of murder using weapons."
Its beyond frustrating to us coastal elites that the NRA and its backers will not recognize the common sense link between the availability and subsequent extremely high number of guns in private hands and the rate of gun violence. You shouldn't have to explain this linkage to a chimpanzee but gun rights advocates just plow on pretending this is a fallacy and pretending that they are primarily using their guns to protect their loved ones and property rather than for recreation.
The latest trope brought out after a regular massacre is that we'd all be safer if everyone was armed to the teeth so that we could combine the law and order of the OK Corral with 21st century military weapons so long as the right people (read: white Christians) are more well armed than anyone else. Thus the domestic arms race continues.....
|
|
kchoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Enter your message here...
Posts: 9,934
|
Post by kchoya on Aug 28, 2015 11:47:16 GMT -5
Here's Howard again: ""I don't come here with any lectures," he said. Australia started with a much lower gun death rate, he said, and "we don't have constitutional guarantees in relation to these things." "However," he added, "that doesn't alter the fact that our murder rate using guns has fallen and there's not much doubt in my mind that it's the availability of guns that causes such a high rate of murder using weapons." Its beyond frustrating to us coastal elites that the NRA and its backers will not recognize the common sense link between the availability and subsequent extremely high number of guns in private hands and the rate of gun violence. You shouldn't have to explain this linkage to a chimpanzee but gun rights advocates just plow on pretending this is a fallacy and pretending that they are primarily using their guns to protect their loved ones and property rather than for recreation. The latest trope brought out after a regular massacre is that we'd all be safer if everyone was armed to the teeth so that we could combine the law and order of the OK Corral with 21st century military weapons so long as the right people (read: white Christians) are more well armed than anyone else. Thus the domestic arms race continues..... - military-grade weapon
- mouth breathers
- never having left North America
- possessing at best a 4th grade knowledge of world history and geography
- black helicopters
- military grade assault rifles
- weekend pretend warfare
- linkage to a chimpanzee
- OK Corral
- white Christians
Congratulations! You just won "I'm better than you" BINGO. Way to go. You didn't even need to use the free space in the middle of your card. The way you use the term "military grade weapon" makes me question whether you have even held a firearm.
|
|
thebin
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,839
|
Post by thebin on Aug 28, 2015 12:03:33 GMT -5
Is the AR-15 not for all intents and purposes an M-16? Can you give me a legitimate purpose for which civilians need this weapon that would override the immense amount of killing it can do when in the wrong hands? Would you agree that in a country where these weapons are easy to procure and are VERY common, they will inevitably fall into the wrong hands? Or do you think someone's right to have fun at the gun range with a weapon useless for hunting or home defense is more important as long as you can cloak it in an absurd notion of maintaining a well armed militia in the age of drones?
|
|
SaxaCD
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,401
|
Post by SaxaCD on Aug 28, 2015 12:08:45 GMT -5
Oh wow didn't hear about the manifesto, if that's what it says then sounds like a hate crime If he killed two random white people just because they were white, this would be a hate crime. He apparently worked with/knew both of the victims and acted out in retaliation because of perceived slights in the workplace. No such thing as a "hate crime" anyway (or maybe, ALL murders are "hate crimes"). I've hardly ever heard of anybody killing someone because they really liked them a lot.
|
|