Doctor Fate wrote:And, if you come back with another trollish answer, that's all you are.

Yet more personal jabbing.

You claim a link between Dear and so-called "incitdent." You have adduced no evidence. I have shown Corkins in his own words saying he used SPLC as a resource to identify his targets.

The latter is not incitement. And sorry, but I did not claim that Dear was specifically incited by a particular source, my argument is that there is incitement against PP going on, and an atmosphere being created in which violence against them is encouraged.

You are a living double-standard.

Whatever. You keep saying you are "done" and you don' care what I think, and yet you keep on posting. And you are devolving into abuse.

My points are made, and I am happy to discuss this with someone else, but not you.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:And, if you come back with another trollish answer, that's all you are.

Yet more personal jabbing.

Yes, you're quite right. I apologize for accurately describing your intentional behavior.

You claim a link between Dear and so-called "incitdent." You have adduced no evidence. I have shown Corkins in his own words saying he used SPLC as a resource to identify his targets.

The latter is not incitement. And sorry, but I did not claim that Dear was specifically incited by a particular source, my argument is that there is incitement against PP going on, and an atmosphere being created in which violence against them is encouraged.

Mm-hmm, so, based on your argumentation, we should arrest every Muslim and shut down every mosque uttering "inciting" language. That ought to be exciting!

If Dear had no contact with any of the so-called "inciters," then everything you've said is irrelevant. You don't care to prove anything. You just claim an environment of incitement, which is utterly disconnected from the shooting. If you want to say that it is, prove it.

You are a living double-standard.

Whatever. You keep saying you are "done" and you don' care what I think, and yet you keep on posting. And you are devolving into abuse.

Your simplistic nonsense is abuse.

My points are made, and I am happy to discuss this with someone else, but not you.

Your point is irrelevant. You are trolling. You claim Dear responded to some sort of stimulus, but then you say he didn't but there is an environment of incitement which may or may not have reached Dear.

In other words, you made NO point because you have NO point.

Fate

Mm-hmm, so, based on your argumentation, we should arrest every Muslim and shut down every mosque uttering "inciting" language. That ought to be exciting

What should be done about Muslims in America who incite violence?
And should it be different than anti-abortionists who incite violence??

rickyp wrote:Fate

Mm-hmm, so, based on your argumentation, we should arrest every Muslim and shut down every mosque uttering "inciting" language. That ought to be exciting

What should be done about Muslims in America who incite violence?
And should it be different than anti-abortionists who incite violence??

I'm just following the man's logic.

Well, and the AG, although she seems more concerned about anti-Muslim violence. I don't recall any mass shootings of Muslims in the US, but I do recall some mass shootings by Muslims. It's weird how she's so concerned about the safety of Muslims when no one is attacking them. Then again, it took a few days to acknowledge the obvious in the San Bernardino shooting, so I guess she might be easily confused.

fate

I don't recall any mass shootings of Muslims in the US, but I do recall some mass shootings by Muslims

Do you? List them. It will be a short list.
But this year there have been over 300 mass shootings by white men in the US. If we followed your logic white men would be under particular scrutiny and we'd be constantly assailed with warning against the perfidy that these cultural monsters were capable of ...
But, being members of the privileged majority we don't hear this...

But maybe its a result of how the media reports these things. For some reason when a white male Christian shoots up a mall or school he's immediatety termed mentally ill.

Prior to San Bernadino there was one mass shooting this year in the US by a Muslim.

Mohammad Youssef Abdulazeez when he recently killed five U.S. soldiers in Chattanooga: radical Islam. Unlike the preceding 206 mass shooters, his religion was not ignored; his religion was the only thing that mattered.
Reports have emerged, however, that Abdulazeez was a drug and alcohol abuser with a history of mental illness. He was ostracized from his family and friends; a loner with little hope. Probably suicidal. But, based on exactly two ambiguous blogposts, Abdulazeez has been repeatedly called "a devout Muslim" and his shootings a terrorist act. He wasn't crazy, we are assured, he was a Muslim. Honestly, though, a devout Muslim? Hardly. Terrorist? Who knows? He died before anyone could question him

.
Then you've got ISIS inspired terrorists like Justin Sullivan. Who clams he was a Muslim convert, but readily fits the profile of the maladjusted loner that most mass shooters are...
But the focus was on his so called religious conversion. (He apparently had never been to a mosque)
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/isi ... ad-n379721

Its always easy to identify the outsiders that are not understood or known. Based on the 3 million strong Muslim population in the US, only about 1 in a million become mass shooters... Less than white men by a long shot.
Although ISIS is a danger and they seem capable of inspiring some Muslims to terror, they seem to have less success than whatever it is that inspires white men to kill at the mall or the cinema.
And they all seem to have easy access to the guns required to make their easy kills.

Not quite accurate, Ricky. There have been over 300 mass shootings in the US this year, but as thqt includes all incidents with more than 4 victims (shot, not necessarily killed). I expect many of the perpetrators were not white.

You claimed white "Christians" were responsible for more shootings than Muslims. Please substantiate or retract.

danivon wrote:Not quite accurate, Ricky. There have been over 300 mass shootings in the US this year, but as thqt includes all incidents with more than 4 victims (shot, not necessarily killed). I expect many of the perpetrators were not white.

Are you including gangs?

You claimed white "Christians" were responsible for more shootings than Muslims. Please substantiate or retract.

I don't think this point really needs to be substantiated, it's patently obvious that it will prove to be the case since we know how many were Muslims and it's a tiny proportion of the whole. I'm sure you'd say something along the lines of how these murderers were not true Christians, but ask down your local mosque and you'd hear the exact same argument coming back at you. Out of 300+ incidents, it would only take 1% of them to be self-declared Christians to substantiate the claim, think about it...

Sassenach wrote:

You claimed white "Christians" were responsible for more shootings than Muslims. Please substantiate or retract.

I don't think this point really needs to be substantiated, it's patently obvious that it will prove to be the case since we know how many were Muslims and it's a tiny proportion of the whole. I'm sure you'd say something along the lines of how these murderers were not true Christians, but ask down your local mosque and you'd hear the exact same argument coming back at you. Out of 300+ incidents, it would only take 1% of them to be self-declared Christians to substantiate the claim, think about it...

Fine, you forced me to go back to Rickyp's original quote so I can reinforce its ridiculousness:

rickyp wrote:You don't hear too much about domestic terrorism in the US. The link above is a list from Daily Beast about recent acts of domestic terrorism.
Conducted by white men. Most who profess to be Christian.

Now, do you still want to defend the idea that "most [instances of domestic terrorism are performed by those] who profess to be Christian?"

I suppose you can--if you go back to the Civil War era and start there. However, in the context of the PP shooting, I don't believe that would be a fair way forward.

It would very much depend on your definition of terrorism. It's undoubtedly the case that the overwhelming majority of mass shooters will have come from Christian backgrounds. Most mass shootings probably don't qualify as terrorism though, and if we're going to include gangland shootings into the overall figure then most will have been non-white as well most likely. But even so, given that the number of Muslims involved in domestic terror incidents in the US is so low, it does seem probable that far more events have been carried out by white Christians, even if Ricky was over-egging the point as usual.

A Christian background does not equate a Christian anymore that my atheistic background makes me an Atheist.

Can we get beyond this mis-characterization?

Sassenach wrote:It would very much depend on your definition of terrorism. It's undoubtedly the case that the overwhelming majority of mass shooters will have come from Christian backgrounds. Most mass shootings probably don't qualify as terrorism though, and if we're going to include gangland shootings into the overall figure then most will have been non-white as well most likely. But even so, given that the number of Muslims involved in domestic terror incidents in the US is so low, it does seem probable that far more events have been carried out by white Christians, even if Ricky was over-egging the point as usual.

Sure. Define "terrorism" and then let's have a go. Feel free to both define it and then show that white Christians engage in it often.

Back to the problem at hand. The only gun laws I've seen proposed that would have any effect are the proposals to ban them altogether. That will not happen in my lifetime.

bbauska

Can we get beyond this mis-characterization?

What most muslims ask every day.....

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/vide ... bruv-video

rickyp wrote:bbauska

Can we get beyond this mis-characterization?

What most muslims ask every day.....

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/vide ... bruv-video

And, of course, no support for your LIE about white Christians.