Mass shooting in Dayton Ohio

banie01 · 04-08-2019 01:56PM #1

Another mass shooting in US today with multiple fatalities.(Within 13hrs of El Paso attack)

Edit: 9 dead and 26 wounded in Dayton Ohio.
The shooter was killed within @1minute of opening fire yet 35people were hit.
Surely evidence that high capacity semi auto or full auto have no real place in "public" hands.
Shooter also in body armour

The US is reaping the benefits of Trump and right wing antagonism.
I really do hope that some change can be brought about to cut the volume of these incidents and reduce the divisiveness that is driving so many people to these acts

That White men are the primary actors in these attacks, needs to be addressed and dealt with.

p1akuw47h5r3it · 04-08-2019 01:57PM

How so?

banie01 · 04-08-2019 01:59PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

How so?

How are white men behind most attacks in US at present?

Or how do I propose that, that particular factor be dealt with?

Silentcorner · 04-08-2019 02:02PM

"White men"...jesus christ...is that kind of bigotry appropriate?

p1akuw47h5r3it · 04-08-2019 02:03PM

banie01 wrote: »

How are white men behind most attacks in US at present?

Or how do I propose that, that particular factor be dealt with?

The 2nd one.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:14PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

The 2nd one.

Honestly I don't know.
There is no simple overarching answer.
Identifying the factors that drive people to think that mass shootings are a path to anything other than death?
What change other than efforts to restrict gun ownership have these actions ever wrought in the US?
Use the tactics already in place in the UK to deradicalise those people.

The kneejerk reaction is always "control the guns".
There are so many in circulation Stateside, and gun ownership is so ingrained in the consciousness of the US that just taking them, restricting or reducing them isn't an immediate option.

If school shootings and dead children haven't caused a backlash in ownership, I don't think much else will TBH.
There does need to be a concerted effort to recognise the causes of disaffection that drives these attacks.
They need to be addressed as terrorism.
The rush to paint each new attack as a mental health issue and tie the gun ownership issue up in that dialogue needs to stop IMO.

A concerted effort to identify and address the "Native"
and anti immigration element and the drive behind violence rather than civil action.
Violence rarely has a part to play in politics and when your argument descends to violence, unless you are trying to force another party to negotiate...
You have already lost.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:15PM

Silentcorner wrote: »

"White men"...jesus christ...is that kind of bigotry appropriate?

As a white man...
Yes

InTheShadows · 04-08-2019 02:15PM

More thinly veiled anti white people racism.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:19PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

More thinly veiled anti white people racism.

What's thinly veiled about it?
If it were multiple attacks being carried about by any portion of a population with their ethnicity as a driver, surely it should be called out for what it is?

Is it racist to describe black on black violence as a black problem?
Is it racist to call out Latino gang crime as a Latino problem?

When the shooters race/ethnicity is a driving factor in why they shoot, why is it racist to query it?

careless sherpa · 04-08-2019 02:20PM

banie01 wrote: »

Honestly I don't know.
There is no simple overarching answer.
Identifying the factors that drive people to think that mass shootings are a path to anything other than death?
What change other than efforts to restrict gun ownership have these actions ever wrought in the US?
Use the tactics already in place in the UK to deradicalise those people.

The kneejerk reaction is always "control the guns".
There are so many in circulation Stateside, and gun ownership is so ingrained in the consciousness of the US that just taking them, restricting or reducing them isn't an immediate option.

If school shootings and dead children haven't caused a backlash in ownership, I don't think much else will TBH.
There does need to be a concerted effort to recognise the causes of disaffection that drives these attacks.
They need to be addressed as terrorism.
The rush to paint each new attack as a mental health issue and tie the gun ownership issue up in that dialogue needs to stop IMO.

A concerted effort to identify and address the "Native"
and anti immigration element and the drive behind violence rather than civil action.
Violence rarely has a part to play in politics and when your argument descends to violence, unless you are trying to force another party to negotiate...
You have already lost.

This sort of stuff is driven by a disconnect the perpetrator feels with society. It is built from a foundation of the neo liberal economic basis to society. Dog eat dog, survival of the fittest. That the perpetrators are neither does not stop them trying to be for a fleeting moment. The removal of society and economy from a rational construct to one firmly routed in the belief of a natural order is leading to greater disconnectedness

TheValeyard · 04-08-2019 02:24PM

You can blame Trump for a lot of things. But US shootings have been going on for countless years, regardless of who is in power. After Sandyhook Obama did everything to try curb gun violence but met a powerful brick wall. If Sandy hook could not convince Americans to change, nothing would or will.

InTheShadows · 04-08-2019 02:25PM

Black's kill more people per day with guns than any other sector of American society. But you know Trump something something

InTheShadows · 04-08-2019 02:26PM

TheValeyard wrote: »

You can blame Trump for a lot of things. But US shootings have been going on for countless years, regardless of who is in power. After Sandyhook Obama did everything to try curb gun violence but met a powerful brick wall. If Sandy hook could not convince Americans to change, nothing would or will.

This. If Sandy Hook didn't end the gun debate nothing will.

rizzodun · 04-08-2019 02:27PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

More thinly veiled anti white people racism.

I remember not so long ago when anything terrorist related happened on this site you wouldn't get 10 posts in before someone mentioned "religion of peace"

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:28PM

Just to add.
Regarding Dayton.
I do not yet know the Ethnicity or Motivations of that particular shooter...

It does not alter IMO the fact that the majority of mass shooter in the US are disaffected White men.
It is a conmanality that is quite pronounced and needs to be addressed IMO.

The driving factors behind the radicalism that drives anyone of any colour to believe pulling a trigger is a solution needs addressing.
Be it racism, social isolation and division, political belief or some kind of Uber environmental belief that they can be Thanos with a gun

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:32PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

Black's kill more people per day with guns than any other sector of American society. But you know Trump something something

More thinly veiled anti-black racism?

It's not Trump something, something.
It's the simple and unavoidable fact that Trump's rhetoric is a driving force in the hardening of many peoples opinions on race and whether radical action is warranted or even tacitly supported by those in power.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:33PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

This. If Sandy Hook didn't end the gun debate nothing will.

Believe me, I 100% agree with this point.
Nothing short of a miracle and guns magically evaporating is going to change the availability of guns stateside.

Harry Palmr · 04-08-2019 02:35PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

Black's kill more people per day with guns than any other sector of American society. But you know Trump something something

at least provide some statistic data to back that claim up.

p1akuw47h5r3it · 04-08-2019 02:42PM

banie01 wrote: »

More thinly veiled anti-black racism?

It's not Trump something, something.
It's the simple and unavoidable fact that Trump's rhetoric is a driving force in the hardening of many peoples opinions on race and whether radical action is warranted or even tacitly supported by those in power.

This was happening before Trump. The racial undertone of American politics has always existed, but imo was really seized upon primarily be leftwing media during Obamas presidency. In fact, it probably really got going towards the end of Obama's administration (Black lives matter, White lives matter, blue lives matter, All lives matter etc.) And just so we don't get our wires crossed, I thought Obama was quite a good President and don't believe he was responsible for really any of it.

Trumps just added petrol to the flames.

Venom · 04-08-2019 02:43PM

banie01 wrote: »

More thinly veiled anti-black racism?

It's not Trump something, something.
It's the simple and unavoidable fact that Trump's rhetoric is a driving force in the hardening of many peoples opinions on race and whether radical action is warranted or even tacitly supported by those in power.

If that were true then mass shootings in America would only have started in the last few years.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:49PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

This was happening before Trump. The racial undertone of American politics has always existed, but imo was really seized upon primarily be leftwing media during Obamas presidency. In fact, it probably really got going towards the end of Obama's administration (Black lives matter, White lives matter, blue lives matter, All lives matter etc.) And just so we don't get our wires crossed, I thought Obama was quite a good President and don't believe he was responsible for really any of it.

Trumps just added petrol to the flames.

I agree that it has always been present in American Politics and between the world of Twitter where ever single issue seems to rapidly descend into polarised opposites, rather than considered debate.
Many will harp on about the middle ground, I do think it's still where the vast majority of populations lie.
BUT, that's not who drives discourse or grabs soundbites, unfortunately it's the extreme on both ends of the spectrum that is shouting loudest.

That the President is quite openly racist and courts the right wing rather than being "Presidential" and by that I mean being a genuine consensus builder, does IMO add more than just petrol to the flames.

It's petrol with the added benefit of verbal napalm.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 02:49PM

Venom wrote: »

If that were true then mass shootings in America would only have started in the last few years.

Care to explain the logic behind that?

limnam · 04-08-2019 02:52PM

Fox 8 news ohio is discussing Cats sleeping on mans face.....

p1akuw47h5r3it · 04-08-2019 02:58PM

banie01 wrote: »

I agree that it has always been present in American Politics and between the world of Twitter where ever single issue seems to rapidly descend into polarised opposites, rather than considered debate.
Many will harp on about the middle ground, I do think it's still where the vast majority of populations lie.
BUT, that's not who drives discourse or grabs soundbites, unfortunately it's the extreme on both ends of the spectrum that is shouting loudest.

That the President is quite openly racist and courts the right wing rather than being "Presidential" and by that I mean being a genuine consensus builder, does IMO add more than just petrol to the flames.

It's petrol with the added benefit of verbal napalm.

I agree completely, particularly with most people still being in the centre (and I'll be robbing that verbal napalm quote;) )

I said on a different thread that it's crazy how in ~10 years America went from two centrists (Obama and MCain) to Trump and Clinton (who ran more as a progressive). I just hope that the Dems pick a real moderate to run against Trump, and win.

Obama had a quote from the 2004 Dem National convention:

Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America — there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America — there's the United States of America.

The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I've got news for them, too: We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don't like federal agents poking around in our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States, and, yes, we've got some gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and there are patriots who supported the war in Iraq.

This type of reasoning is needed in America now more then anytime since the 70's.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 03:08PM

DanDan6592 wrote: »

I agree completely, particularly with most people still being in the centre (and I'll be robbing that verbal napalm quote;) )

I said on a different thread that it's crazy how in ~10 years America went from two centrists (Obama and MCain) to Trump and Clinton (who ran more as a progressive). I just hope that the Dems pick a real moderate to run against Trump, and win.

I agree.
I think that it's become too much about the US electorate identifying as left Vs right.
There is no space for nuance or actual politicking in the US at the moment as every single issue is very quick reduced to binary.

And feel free to use it, I'm just glad it made sense!

DanDan6592 wrote: »

This type of reasoning is needed in America now more then anytime since the 70's.

The purpose of a government, of any government is IMHO.
To provide the best benefit, representation, security and care to the widest portion of its population.
That doesn't mean left, right or centre IMO.
It means progressive and open discourse to drive broad consensus.

It may well mean right wing policing and defence policies with what the US would consider left wing policies of social supports and healthcare.

It's not a one size fits all system, it's fitting your solution to the problem.
Unfortunately a growing trend in politics means that logic is being reversed and every problem is being approached thru the optics of left v right and solutions are being thrown out because of perception.

InTheShadows · 04-08-2019 03:35PM

Harry Palmr wrote: »

at least provide some statistic data to back that claim up.

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-by-raceethnicity/

Plenty other freely available stats out there.

Blacks kill more per capita than any other ethnic grouping.

Sonny noggs · 04-08-2019 03:38PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

Black's kill more people per day with guns than any other sector of American society. But you know Trump something something

Yeah but calling out black on black violence is racist. And anyway, society is to blame.

InTheShadows · 04-08-2019 03:40PM

banie01 wrote: »

Believe me, I 100% agree with this point.
Nothing short of a miracle and guns magically evaporating is going to change the availability of guns stateside.

I know. I spent 15 years living in the US and you'd be amazed at what on the face of it looks like normal every day people holding a virtual arsenal of weapons.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 03:43PM

InTheShadows wrote: »

https://www.kff.org/other/state-indicator/firearms-death-rate-by-raceethnicity/

Plenty other freely available stats out there.

That's a nice way to dance around random unprovoked incidents of mass shootings targeting race or sexuality.

How many incidents of mass shootings of the 251 incidents to date in the US this year were carried out by people of colour?

Yes black violence is higher, particularly in areas like Chicago.
However that is primarily gang driven and as such however perverse the motivation for the shooting, there is a motive other than "I'm angry and racist"

Of the total number of school shootings, how many have been carried out by people of colour?
Of the total of spree shootings, how many have been carried out by people of colour?

It's quite disingenuous to conflate the total US gun violence figure including gang, domestic violence and robbery with Spree shootings and then claim it's racist when the predominantly white ethnic background of spree shooters is raised.

banie01 · 04-08-2019 03:45PM

Sonny noggs wrote: »

Yeah but calling out black on black violence is racist.

It really isn't IMO.

Sonny noggs wrote: »

and anyway, society is to blame.

For black on black?
For gun violence in general? Or spree shootings in particular?

Sonny noggs · 04-08-2019 03:48PM

banie01 wrote: »

It really isn't IMO.

Great.

quote="banie01;110878747"]For black on black?
For gun violence in general? Or spree shootings in particular?[/quote]

Black on black violence.

Mass shooting in Dayton Ohio

Comments