October 2, 2006

Clueless

What would possess anyone to want to go to a school and kill children?

And why has it almost become a fad among the "I can't take it anymore" mental cases?

Anyone have an answer? Guess? Speculation?

I'm at a loss.

16 Comments:

At 10/02/2006 1:43 PM, Blogger demgorilla said...

Watching those Amish folks huddled outside of their one-room schoolhouse brings back memories of Harrison Ford's outstanding movie, "Witness." It also shows us, once again, the awful stain of violence that afflicts us all, regardless of where we live.

I don't know the answer to our fascination with guns and being the wild, wild west, but I do know that far too many young people are toting guns to schools. I know it starts with the parents. I know it starts at home. I know -- but 30 years ago young people weren't carrying guns into schools and shooting classmates.

It's a horror beyond imagination and the richest nation on the earth, which seeks to perfect Iraq and the Middle East, is afflicted by its own unacceptably high level of violence. What a sad Monday for America.

It's not 9-11, but it's 10-2 -- and it involves Americans killing schoolchildren in their countryside school.

 
At 10/02/2006 1:52 PM, Blogger Kankakee Voice said...

It's awful. It's horrible. These people are very, very sick - mentally and emotionally, obviously. Not an excuse. And they should be punished to the full extent of the law. No excuse is acceptable when it comes to killing or harming children.

But when people are crazy, are emotionally sick, they often crave either attention and/or have grave problems in their thinking that make them knit things together in their own minds that make absolutely no sense to anyone but them. Again. Not an excuse. But that's why these people are called "crazy" or "out of their minds" or mentally ill or emotionally ill.

 
At 10/02/2006 2:35 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

KK,
I think you've hit the nail on the head as far as trying to make any sense of these tragedys.

They simply DON'T make any sense. Insanity is pretty much what you'd said, connecting dots, cause and effect, etc. that simply make no sense whatsoever.

And as DemGorilla notes, it's impossible to imagine how many thousands of innocent lives would have been spared if guns weren't flooding the streets in this gun insane country.

Speaking of insane, how insane is it that the NRA can buy off our government and work to ensure that guns are nearly more numerous than people? Almost anyone can get a gun, insane or not, and the NRA fights tooth, fang, and claw to keep it that way.

It's far harder to get a driver's license than to get a high powered rifle with armor piercing bullets, and it's not that tough to get a driver's license.

Hell, in the aftermath of 9-11, Ashcroft even forbid the FBI from looking into the gun purchasing history of suspected terrorists, fearing it would violate their rights!!

This country has absolutely INSANE policies when it comes to controlling firearms and keeping them out of the hands of nutjobs and criminals.

The government can do little to prevent people from becoming insane, but they sure could do a much better job ensuring that any nutcase can't easily get a gun with which to play out their murderous and twisted desire for attention.

America stands alone as the most violent, and gun filled nation on earth. I fail to see how that's something to be proud of.

 
At 10/02/2006 6:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

We are living in an evil age. It will only get worse.

 
At 10/02/2006 10:02 PM, Anonymous cage fighter said...

I just read in the paper that Sen. Jacobs is doing his best to make sure that it does get worse by supporting giving people the right to carry concealed weapons.

Just what we need.

How stupid can you get?

 
At 10/03/2006 8:46 PM, Blogger nicodemus said...

Cagefighter, read my 2nd post in the entry above, dated Oct 2, about Jacobs and concealed carry. Yeah, I am a little-longwinded, but if you read it, maybe you will learn something about guns and why this is the smartest thing Mike Jacobs has done.

As far as "Why did the school shooter do it"? Why? Because he is a sick bastard. A normal rational person cannot comprehend such a horrible thing, so that is sort of a dumb question. But if you want some explanation about who this guy was, go to http://news.yahoo.com/fc/US/School_Violence

 
At 10/04/2006 8:19 AM, Anonymous havinfun said...

Now this answer will get those on the hybrid-socialist front going...

There have always been sick and disturbed people in the world, however, they have not gone to this extreme, with this frequency before. It is an accurate, but shallow, response to pass it off as a few sick and crazy people doing sick acts.

Put these people together with the kids that chopped up the girl a year or two ago, the child preditors - multiply it by the hundreds that we never hear about and it is far more than a few crazy people.

The fact is that our society has devalued life, whether it be the unfettered violence on video games (which many of these 'crazies' have themselves discussed)which numbs people (especially those that are a little disturbed to begin with)to the reality of violence , the intentional and promoted killing of a baby (by calling it choice), the court-ordered killing of Terry Schaivo (because we deemed that life not worthy to be lived) - etc.

Let's face it - we as a society have devalued life, yet we get freaked out when an individual devalues a life (in a manner that we do not find acceptable).

Crazy, sick people - most definately. However, does not a reasonable person have to at least ask...why only recently have crazy people (which have always existed) manifested their craziness in such a destructive manner (again, with such frequency).

I appreciate that the hybrid-socialist does not like to think of the reality that every action has a reaction, a consequence - however, this is reality and I believe that we are startng to see this reality in a very ugly way.

******** ***********

Also, does one think that the nut-case in PA could not have found an illegal gun, or if not, that he would not have done this with a hunting knife? We need to quit deflecting the issue and blaming the NRA (heck, if it was a gun issue, maybe we can solve all the problems by just enforcing gun laws, then we'll never have to worry about a crazy person again...).

 
At 10/04/2006 8:34 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Will one of you chuckle-heads that keep tossing around the meaningless term "hybrid-socialist" PLEASE give some idea of what the hell you think that means?

Otherwise, it makes you look like absolute morons tossing around some $3 word without having a freaking clue what you're talking about.

Mowen hatched it, and has used it about 75 times now without, to my knowledge, ever letting anyone in on just what it means. (IF he knows himself.)

As to your pro-gun arguments, they're lame, in my opinion, and at best are far from a solid case for more guns.

Any fool can realize that the fewer guns in fewer hands means fewer gun deaths.

You don't have to be real bright to absorb that basic fact.

 
At 10/04/2006 11:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Havinfun is Mowen.
Read his blog.
It says the exact same thing that the post above yours does except he calls you out and even says he doesn't post here.
Typical.

 
At 10/04/2006 2:14 PM, Blogger IHG said...

Come on Dope - I have expounded on 'Social-Hybrid' numerous times...you just keep ducking responding to it as you get a little flustered when asked to dialogue with facts and reason.

But thanks for asking.

Watch the site - I'll deal with it again soon and watch you hide from addressing real issues once again.

Jim

 
At 10/04/2006 8:46 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Jim, don't flatter yourself. I and several others have tried to "dialogue" with you in the past and have found that you're dishonest, duck points and arguments and selectively respond to straw men arguments of your own invention.

You can't have a rational argument like that.

And guess what? I'm not going to change your mind, and I'm not going to suddenly adopt your particular outlook on things.

What's the point?

And for the benefit of readers, you've issued the clearly unserious challenge to me to come to YOUR site and represent the "ultra-left, hybrid socialist" views on:

Abortion
Parental Notification
Hugo Chavez
Voter ID

First of all, this shows you're not really serious in the least.

I'm one individual and you expect me to represent this vast and imaginary group you tar as "ultra liberal hybrid socialists".

That's simply stupid. No one would ever respond or take such a proposal seriously.

If you want to debate liberals so badly, why don't you venture over to Daily KOS or Eschaton and try spouting some of your views? You'd get a much wider variety of views from the left, rather than the stupid idea that you can set up one person and say they represent (or even know) the views of your boogy-man groups you've invented in your own mind.

That very premise is idiotic and no serious person would even dream it up.

Again, constantly relying on setting up phony straw men to shoot down.

You expect me to go to your site and somehow represent and be an authoritative voice for every shade of liberal on a subject as vast and complex as abortion?
Are you nuts?

And that's only one topic you expect me to both be expert in as well as to single-handedly represent the view of millions of people to the left of you. (and trust me, that includes most people)

It's foolish to even think someone could, let alone expect them to do so.

And that's not all. I'm also supposed to expound on Parental Notification, the freaking president of Venezuela, and "Voter ID", an issue which will never go anywhere and which could be summed up by either saying you're for it or against it.

But if you want MY views as an individual, here ya go.

Abortion - I think women should have access to safe, legal abortion. If you don't approve of abortion, DON'T GET ONE.

Parental Notification - I don't think that requireing parental notification in ALL instances is reasonable. A parent should not be able to dictate whether a woman (or girl) has to become a parent or not.

Hugo Chavez - I think it's stupid and probably dangerous to instantly dismiss everything he says out of hand. A lot of his beefs against the U.S. are perfectly valid, and they also reflect the views of an enormous and growing portion of the world.

I also agree with his desire that non-aligned countries should be free to determine their own futures, both economically and politically without the U.S., in the guise of the World Bank or CIA attempting to hi-jack their economies or topple their elected government.

Voter ID - Not a good idea, reeks of attempts from the right in the south to disenfranchise blacks, and from what I've heard, this will have the same effect on many poor and minority voters.
Just another attempt by the right to supress the vote and limit, rather than expand, the vote.

Those are MY views, NOT some blanket views of one of your goofy little labels.

I and others have given up trying to argue with you due to the fact that you can't seem to deal with anything without relying on catagorizing us into ridiculously specific little boxes with equally ridiculous labels, and frankly, I haven't looked at your place lately because I find it doesn't offer anything interesting or thought provoking and frankly, is boring.

My life outside the blog and running TID keeps me plenty busy and when I can find time to spend online, I'd rather spend it somewhere more interesting to me. Sorry.

The last time we argued here I made a fool out of you and you went into an absolute melt-down leaving about a dozen freaked out comments each more desperant than the last. I was starting to worry about your health. I almost felt bad and it was kind of alarming.

So, just relax, enjoy reading your own stuff, and go ahead and think you've scared me off if it helps.

It's like refusing to play basketball with someone who insists that they score four points every time they cross the center line is stupid, pointless, and a waste of time. And it's not because yoy're afraid they'll beat you. It's because they invent their own game. What's the point?

I and others gave it a try and realized you're just not that good at knowing how to argue or debate.

It's not worth the time.

But the fact is that it's a waste of time to argue with you as you pay no attention to your opponents arguments and instead appear to be arguing with someone else entirely, namely, the boogy men in your own mind which you conveniently, A. invent, B. ascribe, words, thoughts, actions, and/or motivations to, and then C. argue against the straw man you just erected and then crow about winning.

Congratulations, you just won against yourself.

It's kind of weird, frankly. And not legitimate debate.

And I'm not the only one. Several people have tried to argue issues with you and have noted the same thing. They write their arguments and you come back with stuff which was never mentioned and ignore most of their arguments, if not all of them entirely.

Sorry.

Good luck finding someone who'll enjoy your refusal to directly respond to valid arguments and fondness for straw man arguments.

Apparently you've resorted to commenting under another name here, and that's fine. I'm sure myself or others can deal with that.

But arguing circles with someone who's only weapons are goofy labels and avoiding the argument just isn't my idea of a good use of my time.

 
At 10/05/2006 7:55 AM, Blogger IHG said...

Wow...and you suggest that I went into a meltdown at some point!?

Dope, all I have ever down is asked you to discuss your ideas - and provide a little FACT when doing so.

"Voter ID" - I ask, what on earth could be so wrong about asking someone to prove that they are who they say. One needs a photo-ID to buy beer, cigarettes, etc. - and if you do not have one and are infirmed (and cannot get one) - they will come to your house and get you one. These are FACTS. Your rebuttal is as simples as - "it reeks of the right disenfranchising the black vote in the south" - that's it, that is all you have?

"Abortion" - I provide the FACTS that the heartbeat starts at 19-days and the brainwaves start at 21-days...and do nothing other than ask 'how does a pro-abortion person reconcile this?' (and receive not one logical, rational response).


I provide a FACT, and you dodge.

I can certainly understand why you do not like to debate me.

Jim

 
At 10/05/2006 9:48 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Jim at 7:55

You're delusional and impossible to debate logically.

First, I have NEVER debated you on either of those topics. So why are you acting as if I had???!!!!

That's delusional Jim. I've never read anything you've written on either the Voter ID or abortion issues, OK?

I know that's hard for you to imagine, but it's the truth.

When I said yesterday that I hadn't bothered going to your site, I meant it.

So, you're saying I'm refusing to respond to your facts when the real fact is, I've never read your arguments nor do I have any desire to do so.

I'm not here for the purpose of arguing or debating anyone, even you Jim, as hard as that may be for you to understand.

And as I've said, I've done so several times with the result that I found you slippery, duplicitous, nearly entirely reliant on straw man arguments, and basically a very poor debater. Who needs it?

I'm here to run my blog.

Neither am I here as an official spokesman for everyone you conveniently lump into whacky groups like "hybrid-socialist" or the rest. I won't respond to your stupid suggestion that I step into that role, and neither would any other serious person.

As to voter ID, there is absolutely NO REASON for requiring them, first of all. What pressing problem is it designed to address Jimbo?

What's that? You fear illegal aliens voting? Your racist fears kicking in again?

Well Jim, rest easy. There are no reports of illegal aliens voting. It just doesn't happen. Illegals don't want to be noticed by authorities, they're NOT going to try to vote, period.

So as I've seen proponents of this ridiculous idea say that it's a response to prevent illegals or non-citizens from voting, I think the entire idea is yet another transparent attempt to supress legal voters from minority and other voting groups disquised as a response to this literally MYTHICAL threat.

And apparently they have dupes such as yourself to help promote it. You've been a useful idiot for the right for some time now Jim. I expect they'll reward you well even after the movement collapses. It's paid of handsomely for many.

Again, there is NO NEED for a voter ID card, it would serve as a deterrent to groups such as Native Americans in particular (what is your problem with these people?) as they often don't have the documents that this measure would require people to provide. And how are the poor, many who don't have cars, supposed to come up with a driver's license to be able to cast a vote?

The Voter ID idea is:

A: a response to a non-existent problem

B. a transparent attempt to enact a scheme which would have the end result of disenfranchising thousands and thousands of poor, minority, and largely Democratic voters.

Abortion?
Again, Jim, if you don't agree with abortion, I suggest you don't get one.

End of story.

 
At 10/05/2006 10:07 PM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Jim at 7:55

You're delusional and impossible to debate logically.

First, I have NEVER debated you on either of those topics. So why are you acting as if I had???!!!!

That's delusional Jim. I've never read anything you've written on either the Voter ID or abortion issues, OK?

I know that's hard for you to imagine, but it's the truth.

When I said yesterday that I hadn't bothered going to your site, I meant it.

So, you're saying I'm refusing to respond to your facts when the real fact is, I've never read your arguments nor do I have any desire to do so.

And unfortunately, your "facts" that you spout off about and base your arguments on are often nothing more than right wing or fundementalist based dogma or conventional wisdom.

Sorry Jim, but that doesn't qualify it as "factual"

You can't argue using unverifiable myths as the foundation of your argument. Get that through your head.

I could go on and on (and I already have) about just why you're a waste of time to engage in debate with. You use all sorts of dishonest and weird tactics to skew the debate, assume unproven "facts" without foundation as the entire premise of an argument, and on and on.

I could, and have, taken your attempts at defending your views or "debating" and take it apart bit by bit and show how dishonest it is.

Yet you actually think it's your "facts" or arguments that is the reason no one wants to "debate" you? Ha!

It's because it's impossible to HAVE an honest debate with you Jim. That's just the sad truth.

And it's not just me saying so. Others have tried and walked away in disgust and frustration, not at being proven wrong, but because trying to have a rational debate with you is like trying to nail jello to the wall.

It's as I said, there's no point to competing with someone doesn't play by the rules.

I'm not here for the purpose of arguing or debating anyone, even you Jim, as hard as that may be for you to understand.

And as I've said, I've done so several times with the result that I found you slippery, duplicitous, nearly entirely reliant on straw man arguments, and basically a very poor debater. Who needs it?

I'm here to run my blog.

Neither am I here as an official spokesman for everyone you conveniently lump into whacky groups like "hybrid-socialist" or the rest. I won't respond to your stupid suggestion that I step into that role, and neither would any other serious person.

As to voter ID, there is absolutely NO REASON for requiring them, first of all. What pressing problem is it designed to address Jimbo?

What's that? You fear illegal aliens voting? Your racist fears kicking in again?

Well Jim, rest easy. There are no reports of illegal aliens voting. It just doesn't happen. Illegals don't want to be noticed by authorities, they're NOT going to try to vote, period.

So as I've seen proponents of this ridiculous idea say that it's a response to prevent illegals or non-citizens from voting, I think the entire idea is yet another transparent attempt to supress legal voters from minority and other voting groups disquised as a response to this literally MYTHICAL threat.

And apparently they have dupes such as yourself to help promote it. You've been a useful idiot for the right for some time now Jim. I expect they'll reward you well even after the movement collapses. It's paid of handsomely for many.

Again, there is NO NEED for a voter ID card, it would serve as a deterrent to groups such as Native Americans in particular (what is your problem with these people?) as they often don't have the documents that this measure would require people to provide. And how are the poor, many who don't have cars, supposed to come up with a driver's license to be able to cast a vote?

The Voter ID idea is:

A: a response to a non-existent problem

B. a transparent attempt to enact a scheme which would have the end result of disenfranchising thousands and thousands of poor, minority, and largely Democratic voters.

Abortion?
Again, Jim, if you don't agree with abortion, I suggest you don't get one.

End of story.

 
At 10/06/2006 7:03 AM, Blogger IHG said...

Chill Dope -

Please accept my apologies - you are so incredibly smart and as you have the last word, it is your site afterall, I'll bow out gracefully.

You are right. I am wrong.
Please excuse me for trying to bring facts into a discussion on a topic, I know that in your world facts have no use (in two long-winded responses you refuse to address the facts (whether you agree with them or not, they are facts...you are free to address them as wrong, but you do not even have the willingness to do that much - you ignore them and pretend that they are made up).

 
At 10/06/2006 7:50 AM, Blogger The Inside Dope said...

Mowen, how can I chill when I'm arguing with a nut?

I mean, you may not be nuts, but your arguments are ridiculous.

First of all, I guess you're sore because I didn't say, Gee Jim, those things you said are facts.

Think about it.

I didn't agree they're factual because... yep... you guessed it, I don't KNOW that they're facts.

Do you REALLY expect me to accept the stats, figures, and opinions you spout WITHOUT A SOURCE as facts?

Is that what you're hung up about?

I'm sorry Jim, but I'm not going to simply take your word on things. That's not how it works.

You need to provide sources... you know what those are, right? That's where you tell us where you heard, read, or learned the things you insist are facts.

That way Jim, people can judge their veracity for themselves.

I realize that you can't cite chapeter and verse for every single assertion or fact, but neither can you come around demanding that I somehow acknowledg that the stuff is real, factual, or even true.

And... (MAN, this is tedious, which is a huge part of why no one wants to deal with you) even if what you said about fetuses and heartbeats or whatever is scientifically provable fact, it doesn't affect my view on the issue in the slightest.

And knowing you, it's probably something you think you're being really clever on. You're probably rubbing your thighs hoping I'll agree that it's fact, and then you'll spring some trap and really prove me wrong somehow.

I'm not playing those games. You can say I favor murder, or whatever other games you want, but it doesn't make it so.

This trying to divine where life begins argument is akin to mental masturbation. It will never be proven and is a matter of conscience for each individual to deal with. Trying to say YOUR particular belief on the matter is the only correct one is ridiculous.

And if you follow that idiotic philosophical circle jerk, you end up being against stem cell research because it supposedly kills a clump of a few non-viable cells.

And of course, the hypocrisy would make Jesus blush, as you and others seem to be FAR FAR FAR more concerned with what goes on in some stranger's uterus and the supposed "life" of a clump of cells than the lives of literally tens of thousands of utterly innocent people who's only sin was that they were born and live on top of Bush's oil.

The moral perversion is literally sickening.

So you go on opposing abortion, keep indulging in your mental gymnastics, and in the mean time, nothing is going to change, the Republicans you thought were your saviors on these matters will continue to play you for useful idiots and do nothing, and people who arrive at the decision to have abortions will be able to have them in a safe and medically professional manner.

And again, Jim, considering your beliefs, I would highly recommend that you don't have an abortion.

We won't force you to have one.

So don't try to force others to have a child against their will.

Thanks.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home