Nah, according to my dictionary it has to be in pursuit of a political aim. That would have been my guess, but I thought I'd better check.
The claim by Daesh, you can call them ISIS but they like that, is not credible - yet. Which is a problem with a lot of the early reporting. A 64 year old white millionaire who owned various properties and two airplanes doesn't seem like yer average radical muslim convert.
Google came in for a lot of criticism, early on they linked to 4chan items which were basic conspiracy theory rubbish. The denizens of 4chan even named a wrong suspect, before settling down to try and paint the shooter as antifa or BLM or anything else that entered their disordered minds. Although the fact that the victims were country music fans many of whom would be right thinking people could lead to the assumption that the shooter was a left wing extremist. Assuming there was any logic involved at all?
Facebook too copped flak for some of their content.
The weapons he used were interesting, I hadn't even heard of bump frames or bump stocks previously but there's a heap of stuff about them on YouTube.
Normally the shooting he was doing would be inaccurate as Hell but if you've got 20,000 people on a big dance floor accuracy is not a requirement.
I hope his partner can shed some light on his motives.
About the only thing you can take out of this is that when a major event happens the initial news reports will be wrong. The advances in technology in recent years only exacerbate that, they certainly don't improve things.
There is a grey blur, and a green blur. I try to stay on the grey one. - Joey Dunlop
Afterthought: This latest mass shooting has often been referred to as "the biggest ever" or similar. That is not true, there have been bigger but the victims of those in most instances were black, so perhaps they don't count? Most respectable US news media now use the phrase "biggest in modern times".
There is a grey blur, and a green blur. I try to stay on the grey one. - Joey Dunlop
Afterthought: This latest mass shooting has often been referred to as "the biggest ever" or similar. That is not true, there have been bigger but the victims of those in most instances were black, so perhaps they don't count? Most respectable US news media now use the phrase "biggest in modern times".
*must spread rep around etc.*
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
The weapons he used were interesting, I hadn't even heard of bump frames or bump stocks previously but there's a heap of stuff about them on YouTube.
Normally the shooting he was doing would be inaccurate as Hell but if you've got 20,000 people on a big dance floor accuracy is not a requirement.
Something to add - Bump stocks aren't required for rapid-fire semi-auto techniques - what they do, is make it much easier to perform said technique - there's a couple of Jerry Miculek videos where he demonstrates "full auto" type firing, using the bump-firing technique, but without a bump/slide stock.
The principle of how it works is almost identical to how Buddy Rich's one handed roll in drumming works.
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
The principle of how it works is almost identical to how Buddy Rich's one handed roll in drumming works.
That's a nightmarish thought. He was a grumpy bastard at the best of times. He'd make every bump stock proponent look like a flaccid single-fire rubber-band gun.
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
That's a nightmarish thought. He was a grumpy bastard at the best of times. He'd make every bump stock proponent look like a flaccid single-fire rubber-band gun.
But Goddamn could he play...
Physics; Thou art a cruel, heartless Bitch-of-a-Mistress
Seemingly not a 'terrorist' as there was no apparent agenda, just a nutjob with lots of guns, in a country where it's far too easy to get lots of guns.
I wonder if the greater population of 'merica will one day make the connection and demand change.......
except that's not actually the problem. (but exactly the idea being encouraged) both canada and nz, off the top of my head, have a higher per-capita (legal) firearms ownership rate than the us.
yet somehow more murkns are shot on murkn soil than the middle east..
I've just never seen a white guy labelled as "terrorist" on the papers. But if it's a Muslim or any brown skinned guy with a gun = automatic terrorist.
Timothy McVeigh?
Ted Kaczynski?
Just two I can think of immediately, bound to be more.
Just two I can think of immediately, bound to be more.
Not sure either were labelled that by US press, at the time. Unabomber rather than terrorist. Labelled a domestic terrorist in historical articles, so it is a conditional terrorist label because it doesn't fit the definitive narrative. Domestic terrorist for McVeigh as well in historical articles, but disgruntled ex-military Branch-Davidian supporter at the time. By the time of the trial in '97 that had changed to terrorist.
If a man is alone in the woods and there isn't a woke Hollywood around to call him racist, is he still white?
Originally Posted by Gremlin
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks