Author Topic: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns  (Read 6676 times)

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« on: July 15, 2016, 07:39:51 AM »
from a guardian briefing

Quote
Authorities in Dallas are looking into how gunman Micah Johnson was able to assemble a large quantity of bomb-making equipment at his suburban Mesquite home that he shared with his mother, Delphene. Asked how it was possible that his family could “not know about him stockpiling weapons”,

Meanwhile, murders from a truck spree without guns continue to mount in France, and grave dancers of the anti-gun persuasion are uncharacteristically silent.  Obama has acknowledged this as an act of terrorism rather than a holiday fracas.  Where are all the hordes of obtuse arguing that there's no connection to any organized terrorist group, as y'all did in Boston, the last time that islamist losers followed the al qaeda open source cookbook?

JoshCrow

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #1 on: July 15, 2016, 09:34:25 AM »

Meanwhile, murders from a truck spree without guns continue to mount in France,

Just an FYI, but the guy was also firing a machine gun.
"Andy McArdy told CNN he saw the truck driving at high speed along the promenade and the driver "was firing a machine gun while driving.""

rightleft22

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #2 on: July 15, 2016, 10:32:39 AM »
I don’t understand.

Are you saying that because a person used a truck as a weapon any argument supporting gun regulation becomes void?
OR are you saying that those supporting gun regulation must now come out and argue for new truck regulation.
Implying that this event can be used as an example of how registering, insuring, training and requiring license to operate a truck proves that gun regulation will not work.

JoshCrow

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #3 on: July 15, 2016, 11:07:58 AM »
Implying that this event can be used as an example of how registering, insuring, training and requiring license to operate a truck proves that gun regulation will not work.

To be clear, it seems like the guy used his gun to kill a driver and take a truck. Ergo it doesn't quite show that!

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #4 on: July 15, 2016, 11:15:34 AM »
Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel had a pistol not a machine gun.  While his name is muslim, he apparently ate pork, drank alcohol, did drugs, didn't go to mosque, was a violent criminal, and his wife had just divorced him.  So there might not be a religious angle - just someone angry, depressed, and suicidal.  I think the lory was rented not stolen by killing the driver, but not 100% certain.  There were fake rifles and a dud/fake grenade in the back of the truck.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/15/who-is-the-nice-terror-attacker-everything-we-know-so-far/
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 11:20:14 AM by LetterRip »

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #5 on: July 15, 2016, 11:27:56 AM »
If the details of the Telegraph.uk story are borne out, it highlights the common thread that links all mass murderers, basically that their lives are *censored*ed up beyond repair.  In this case the many details suggest that the problems were circumstantial rather than based on religion or an identified medical (mental) condition, but in the end mass murderers are all outside the range of normal human social behavior.  It's too simplistic to look for an affinity to a denigrated group and blame the group for the individuals actions.  The Telegraph article implies that this event can't be called terrorism, even though that is exactly what many people want to call it.  Face it, there are some majorly *censored*ed up people in the world who will commit egregious acts of violence in the name of some cause or no cause but for their own miserable lives.

LetterRip

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #6 on: July 15, 2016, 11:46:51 AM »
It also appears he wanted to be famous,

Quote
Wissam, a Tunisian neighbour from the same village as the driver claimed: ‘On the Thursday night he was drinking with a colleague and they argued. His pal said you’re worth nothing and he replied: ‘One day, you’ll hear about me.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3691895/He-drank-alcohol-ate-pork-took-drugs-NOT-Muslim-Truck-terrorist-Mohamed-Lahouaiej-Bouhlel-s-cousin-reveals-unlikely-jihadist-beat-wife-NEVER-went-mosque.html

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #7 on: July 15, 2016, 12:01:56 PM »
I'm not buying your explanation AI.  The fact that some mass murderers are crazy, is not a free pass to paint all mass murderers as such.  Plenty of acts of war have resulted in higher death tolls and were the acts of people who were of otherwise normal mental faculties.  You may not like the premise, but a tendency towards violence and even killing is a natural part of the human make up.  It's western society that is the noble aberration on this front.

In any event, its expressly false to downplay murders that are deliberately carried out in support of a cause by pretending they are carried out by the mentally deficient or unstable.  So while Islamic terrorists are mass murderers and so are mentally unstable mass murderers, the two groups themselves are not co-terminous.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #8 on: July 15, 2016, 12:09:18 PM »
I haven't seen any evidence this was carried out in support of a particular cause.

All mass murderers are crazy for a certain definition of crazy. Not a particularly useful definition, true, but something's gone sideways if someone thinks killing people in job lots is a reasonable course of action.

Seriati

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #9 on: July 15, 2016, 12:23:00 PM »
Actually no NobleHunter, they are not all crazy for any meaningful definition of crazy.  They can be perfectly rationale and still carry out those acts.

NobleHunter

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #10 on: July 15, 2016, 12:32:36 PM »
That's a pretty limited definition of perfectly rational.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #11 on: July 15, 2016, 12:59:22 PM »
Quote
You may not like the premise, but a tendency towards violence and even killing is a natural part of the human make up.  It's western society that is the noble aberration on this front.
So is schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, autism and a host of other "natural conditions".  I'm sure you can see that tendencies that manifest in human brain biology are all natural, but not all healthy or desirable.  There's something I've heard called the "shaman effect" that talks about extremes of behavior that are exaggerations of more "normal" parts of human biological tendences.  For every shaman or psychopath you might get a few outstanding thinkers who could become buddhas Shakespeares, Bachs, Picassos or Einsteins and hundreds or thousands of teachers or altruists.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 01:01:58 PM by AI Wessex »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #12 on: July 15, 2016, 02:22:24 PM »
It think it's crazy to think that only crazy people can kill. I suppose the ape with the bone in 2001: A Space Odyssey was 'crazy' too? As Seriati mentioned, killing is the normal, not abnormal, behavior for disagreeable primates. What's abnormal, in a good way, is that people have been brought up of late to believe that killing is very bad, and to have empathy for others such that one does not merely abstain from violence to obey rules but because it feels correct to do so. To whatever extent this education doesn't 'take' in certain people, or becomes unravelled due to hardship and disillusionment, cannot all be chalked up to the person's brain malfunctioning. No doubt some of the time this is so, but one whitewashes human nature too much in pretending that no sane person could ever do such a bad thing.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #13 on: July 15, 2016, 02:58:10 PM »
Quote
The fact that some mass murderers are crazy, is not a free pass to paint all mass murderers as such.

Conversely, the fact that some mass murders are not "crazy" (depending on your definition of "crazy" ;) ) is not a free pass to paint all mass murders as sane. :)

Which makes it very difficult to assign blame in cases where there is no direct link between the terrorist and the supposed terrorist organization.

What prevents someone with mental problems to follow "the al qaeda open source cookbook" for his own reasons?  How do you assign blame?  If the person used a scene from a movie (e.g. "The Dark Knight") to commit an atrocity, does that mean he was trying to advance the politics of the movie?  If he used a scenario from a novel, does that mean the killer was trying to advance the politics of the author?  Would arresting the movie producers or the author help prevent further attacks?

If an organization provides direct support to a terrorist, then there is little question that they are to blame.  But if they just publish some instructions and someone with mental problems uses those instructions, eliminating those who published the instructions would do little good to prevent further attacks, unless you eliminate all such instructions from all sources.

While I have no problem characterizing this attack as a terrorist attack, the mental state of Bouhlel is material for our response.  ISIS and Al Qaeda should be eliminated for other things that they have done.  But if Bouhlel was mentally unstable, aka crazy, then don't expect the end of the war on terror to stop future Bouhlels.  They will simply find other methods and inspirations for their acts.
 

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #14 on: July 15, 2016, 03:14:25 PM »
I don’t understand.

Are you saying that because a person used a truck as a weapon any argument supporting gun regulation becomes void?


Obviously, I am saying that those people who are proposing gun restrictions as a remedy against nutcase shootings and terrorists are moron jackass grave dancers who insult our intelligence.

The discussion of gun regulation is not void, as most gun homicides are not nutcase shootings and terrorist acts.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2016, 04:03:47 PM »
Quote
The fact that some mass murderers are crazy, is not a free pass to paint all mass murderers as such.

Conversely, the fact that some mass murders are not "crazy" (depending on your definition of "crazy" ;) ) is not a free pass to paint all mass murders as sane. :)

Which makes it very difficult to assign blame in cases where there is no direct link between the terrorist and the supposed terrorist organization.

What prevents someone with mental problems to follow "the al qaeda open source cookbook" for his own reasons?  How do you assign blame?  If the person used a scene from a movie (e.g. "The Dark Knight") to commit an atrocity, does that mean he was trying to advance the politics of the movie?  If he used a scenario from a novel, does that mean the killer was trying to advance the politics of the author?  Would arresting the movie producers or the author help prevent further attacks?

If an organization provides direct support to a terrorist, then there is little question that they are to blame.  But if they just publish some instructions and someone with mental problems uses those instructions, eliminating those who published the instructions would do little good to prevent further attacks, unless you eliminate all such instructions from all sources.

wayward, are you being intentionally obtuse, or do you not understand the difference between causality and blameworthiness?

If you never had the chance to learn the difference, then you are blameless for saying something so foolish.

If you've had it explained to you before, but chose not to pay attention, then you are somewhat to blame.

If you really do understand the difference, and yet played stupid for political purposes, then you are very much blameworthy.


 Similarly, if the Dark Knight producers intended to inspire copycat murders, then they are to blame.

If they did not have and could not reasonably have forseen that it would inspire copycats, they are blameless.


The fact that folks imitate the stuff in the open source jihad books shows causality.

The fact that the open source jihad books explicitly intend people to follow them, means that one should reasonably assign blame to the organization that publishes them with that intent.

Finally, the fact that there is offer (promise of eternal life) to those that follow said cookbook, and acceptance via committing the act, creates a contractual connection between ISIS and nutball.

for you to deny that there is a connection, is as stupid as claiming that there's no connection between Khomeini offering a bounty on a writer's head, and an assassin trying to kill said writer.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 04:07:57 PM by Pete at Home »

Fenring

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #16 on: July 15, 2016, 04:13:36 PM »
Finally, the fact that there is offer (promise of eternal life) to those that follow said cookbook, and acceptance via committing the act, creates a contractual connection between ISIS and nutball.

for you to deny that there is a connection, is as stupid as claiming that there's no connection between Khomeini offering a bounty on a writer's head, and an assassin trying to kill said writer.

Pete, this seems to be tangential to what Wayward was saying. He was saying that anyone can take inspiration from anywhere, and that tracing back the source material doesn't particularly address the desire the individual had to conduct mayhem. It's different if the individual would have otherwise minded his own business and was recruited or turned by an organization actively seeking members; then we're looking at a terrorist cell. But if some dude picks up a terrorist manifesto, or a novel, or whatever else, and decides to carry out its concepts in cold blood, at that point the source material is more or less incidental and the real issue is why the person felt they needed to do such things. Maybe the person is crazy, maybe angry, maybe misguided, maybe seeking brief stardom at any cost; there can be many reasons. But we have to be the crazy ones to always take the excuse behind the violence seriously. Sometimes it's not just an excuse, so we to use discernment to figure it out.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #17 on: July 15, 2016, 04:42:38 PM »
Finally, the fact that there is offer (promise of eternal life) to those that follow said cookbook, and acceptance via committing the act, creates a contractual connection between ISIS and nutball.

for you to deny that there is a connection, is as stupid as claiming that there's no connection between Khomeini offering a bounty on a writer's head, and an assassin trying to kill said writer.

Pete, this seems to be tangential to what Wayward was saying. He was saying that anyone can take inspiration from anywhere, and that tracing back the source material doesn't particularly address the desire the individual had to conduct mayhem.

If that's what Wayward meant to say, then he shouldn't have used the word "blame." If you know someone wants to conduct mayhem, and you give him a weapon of mass destruction, or give him the knowledge to turn objects at hand into weapons of mass destruction, then you share the blame for the results.

If you mean to say that we can reduce the threat by making our world more economically fair, by providing more ppportunities for people and reducing despair, then of course I agree. That doesn't mean that we should not bomb the hell out of the satanists that labor to turn desperate people into living bombs, and otherwise recognize their blameworthiness.

Wayward Son

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #18 on: July 15, 2016, 05:02:05 PM »
OK, Pete, you can blame me for using the word "blame." :)

Certainly ISIS and/or Al Qaeda shoulders the blame for publishing those how-to instructions.

But eliminating ISIS and Al Qaeda may not prevent similar attacks from happening, in that if the perpetrator is mentally unstable, he would just find another reason and method for the attack.  So understanding the reason behind the attack is important, if only to temper our expectations of what we can accomplish.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2016, 05:53:01 PM »
OK, Pete, you can blame me for using the word "blame." :)

Certainly ISIS and/or Al Qaeda shoulders the blame for publishing those how-to instructions.

But eliminating ISIS and Al Qaeda may not prevent similar attacks from happening

agreed, because their instructions and the religious promise of eternal life are still out there even if they are all dead.  just as the death of hitler didn't put an end to Naziism.

But when a neonazi shoots up a synagogue, we still call a Nazi a Nazi, even if we can't show an organizational link to the third Reich.

Quote
So understanding the reason behind the attack is important, if only to temper our expectations of what we can accomplish.

absolutely agreed.  If we increase jobs, decrease poverty and inequity, and provide ubiquitous affordable mental health care and meds, that's when we really put a fat dent in ISIS jihadists as well as neonazis, gangbangers, and other murderous groups that feed on despair.

It wouldn't have prevented 9-11, though, since those were all spoiled children of privilege ...
« Last Edit: July 15, 2016, 05:56:23 PM by Pete at Home »

cherrypoptart

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #20 on: July 15, 2016, 06:32:50 PM »
It looks like this guy only had a handgun and though he fired it, he probably didn't kill anyone with it. The other guns and explosives were replicas. The news just said that basically all of the people were murdered with the truck.

As long as we're talking about guns though, it's interesting watching what may be a military takeover in Turkey and apparently Erdogan is encouraging people to take to the streets in protest. I'm not sure what the situation is Turkey with the right of citizens to own firearms but one has to wonder about the effect it could have either way. Everyone seems to assume that a military takeover couldn't happen in America or if it did there would be nothing the citizens could do about it. I wonder how that applies to Turkey.

AI Wessex

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2016, 08:23:44 PM »
Quote
But we have to be the crazy ones to always take the excuse behind the violence seriously. Sometimes it's not just an excuse, so we to use discernment to figure it out.
Well said (and succinct :) ).

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2016, 01:34:34 AM »
Implying that this event can be used as an example of how registering, insuring, training and requiring license to operate a truck proves that gun regulation will not work.

To be clear, it seems like the guy used his gun to kill a driver and take a truck. Ergo it doesn't quite show that!

gasp!  but how is that possible, since france has gun control?  ::)

Mynnion

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2016, 07:47:07 AM »
Implying that this event can be used as an example of how registering, insuring, training and requiring license to operate a truck proves that gun regulation will not work.

To be clear, it seems like the guy used his gun to kill a driver and take a truck. Ergo it doesn't quite show that!

gasp!  but how is that possible, since france has gun control?  ::)


So because someone can use a truck to kill it is somehow illogical or hypocritical to call for gun control?  Sorry but I don't believe anyone who supports gun control has presented an argument that restricting guns would prevent all killings.  Just limit the scope of many.  The crazies are not going to magically disappear.  It will just be harder for them to commit killings on the same scale.

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #24 on: July 17, 2016, 04:35:36 AM »
Implying that this event can be used as an example of how registering, insuring, training and requiring license to operate a truck proves that gun regulation will not work.

To be clear, it seems like the guy used his gun to kill a driver and take a truck. Ergo it doesn't quite show that!

gasp!  but how is that possible, since france has gun control?  ::)



So because someone can use a truck to kill it is somehow illogical or hypocritical to call for gun control?
Straw man.  I never said all gun control arguments are hypocritical. Just that those who scream at us every time there's a mass shooting that those who oppose gun control want to "do nothing" about mass shootings, are illogical and hypocritical and/or dishonest.

The best way to reduce violent deaths isn't gun control, but to adress the roots of violence
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-36807283

Quote
Boubekeur Bakri, an imam from the same area, says he became worried about the rise of extremism as early as 2010. By December 2014 he gathered local officials and Muslim leaders in his mosque to sound the alarm.
Three weeks later the attacks against Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish supermarket confirmed his fears about home-grown jihadists. He calls radicalism an "open wound" for the Muslim community.
The problem, he says, is that having 40% unemployment "lowers the immunity" of marginalised communities, allowing "microbes" to spread.

desperate people will always find a pretext and a means to do violence.  anyone that was a real liberal, as opposed to a monkey of political correctness, would be more interested in providing jobs and hope than banning guns. 

Pete at Home

  • Members
    • View Profile
Re: Good thing Micah johnson only used guns
« Reply #25 on: July 17, 2016, 06:15:38 AM »
Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel had a pistol not a machine gun.  While his name is muslim, he apparently ate pork, drank alcohol, did drugs, didn't go to mosque,

You mean like half the 9-11 hijackers?  Like the dumb and dumber brothers with the Boston marathon?  Like the Crusaders of yore, violent jihad is presented as an alternate sinners way to paradise.  embezzle muslim donations to the poor to get drunk and have sex with Las Vegas strippers for a few years, then make yourself right by Allah with one act of mass murder.

Here's another question for poops and giggles.  If he didn't have the pistol, but had just killed 80 people by rolling over him, would some lefties be complaining blm style that the cops had killed an "unarmed" man?