It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lets not lose sight of the facts.

page: 2
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Then I have to ask the glaringly obvious issue. If (which I'm not ruling out) it is an equalizer to a perceived lack of power, then why do they prey on the weak? Churches, schools, office buildings, night clubs etc? These folks aren't going into places of power like say government buildings, infrastructure nodes or anywhere that would have a lasting effect.

It's always preying upon the unarmed.

You don't have to apologize to me for anything. We won't be seeing a re-visited time in history, but that's not to say that we can't have an updated version with some careful thinking and not pushing the bulk of the issues into the political arena. Should we, then you will be right in the draconian outcome.

ETA: I didn't mean to put words in your mouth, just acknowledge that if the future was so dire and unchangeable, then what was the benefit of commenting.
edit on 6-11-2017 by JinMI because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 10:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Even the violent crazy mass murders still have a sense of self preservation and a fantasy that the act of killing will
bring them the attention they crave. As despicable as the violence is, It's still a cry for help from the perpetrator. Suicide and violent acts are somehow interchangeable in the psychotic.
Society has failed, the family has failed and the institutions to address mental illness are underfunded. The for profit
medical establishment has almost ignored mental illness except to push pills. When you fall thru the cracks you see what
transpires with individuals prone to violence. The indications are almost always there.

I don't see how politics can be ignored in the cultural milieu. Money can solve problems and politics is money.
What are our priorities. To me it looks like for some surreal reason "they" want chaos. Then we start to deal in the mystical...you want to go there?
edit on 6-11-2017 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

You've aptly described exactly why it's not a political issue, to a point. It's important to remember that WE decided what we watch, listen to and form thoughts. Beginning at the earliest forms of education all the way to the drive home from work, we are inundated with thoughts that our not ours but drop in things we do agree with. In order to accept the message is to accept it all. This is how identity politics operate. We don't have to think like that.

So, should we be able to combat the effects of a media that seeks to build an army and instead realize that those "lefties" down the road aren't the enemy, and those "rightys" across the street also aren't the enemy, then that's an important step.

Shutting down the media with our dollars is a positive step. Cutting off the ability for these loons to get their names plastered everywhere after events would have a positive effect. Since Columbine, they've essentially made these arseholes famous.

Now, the mental health aspects. I'm not sure how to approach this. Whos to decide who is stable or not? The drug companies? Doctors who take payments from drug companies? Doctors whom may participate in identity politics? Where is the safe entry point?



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 10:49 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

What a lame argument.

One main difference is that those other deaths from diseases and health issues are typically caused by a persons own actions rather than some douche bag moron killing you for no reason out of the blue. Since we're free to do to ourselves what we please even if it might kill us vs. someone simply deciding to take the lives of others I don't see the point you're trying to get across here.

Also if the real danger to us all is the Media and Identity Politics then why on earth do we have a military using weapons to defeat our enemies in times of war??? Why do we arm LEO's with guns to catch bad guys??? Apparently we should just rely on the media and identity politics to kill all bad people since that seems to be what you're suggesting here???

How can guns be far removed from the cause of death when guns are made for the purpose of causing death??? That's what they're made for. Just because they don't cause as many deaths as heart disease isn't the point. I'm sure death by sword attack is pretty far down the list too but that doesn't mean we allow people to walk around with those either.

I personally have no problem with guns as I was made familiar with them early on and taught how to be responsible with them and around them. But that is obviously not a universal thing people are taught. Even then that doesn't matter much when someone snaps and decides to use their gun collection to act revenge on innocent people because they're a f*ck up or just careless. Taken to the extreme I guess the world would be totally safe if everyone had their own nuke too???

No, of course not because weaponizing people more doesn't make anything safer when people are so unpredictable and dangerous. I hear so many illogical arguments when it comes to this topic it's unbelievable. There are much better and reasonable arguments then whatever it is your trying to say here.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm




One main difference is that those other deaths from diseases and health issues are typically caused by a persons own actions rather than some douche bag moron killing you for no reason out of the blue. Since we're free to do to ourselves what we please even if it might kill us vs. someone simply deciding to take the lives of others I don't see the point you're trying to get across here.


Your correct. The top 10 all have a self inflicting manner, but are facilitated, mostly by legal means in the ends. Weird, huh?




Also if the real danger to us all is the Media and Identity Politics then why on earth do we have a military using weapons to defeat our enemies in times of war??? Why do we arm LEO's with guns to catch bad guys??? Apparently we should just rely on the media and identity politics to kill all bad people since that seems to be what you're suggesting here???


Not sure what your aim is here. You think only those in areas of government should have guns or you see nothing implicating the media or identity politics?




How can guns be far removed from the cause of death when guns are made for the purpose of causing death??? That's what they're made for. Just because they don't cause as many deaths as heart disease isn't the point. I'm sure death by sword attack is pretty far down the list too but that doesn't mean we allow people to walk around with those either.


Guns are tools. Just a guess here but I would wager that many more bullets are expended into target shooting and hoarding more than are used to cause death.




I personally have no problem with guns as I was made familiar with them early on and taught how to be responsible with them and around them. But that is obviously not a universal thing people are taught. Even then that doesn't matter much when someone snaps and decides to use their gun collection to act revenge on innocent people because they're a f*ck up or just careless. Taken to the extreme I guess the world would be totally safe if everyone had their own nuke too???


In a country that values our constitution, don't you think this should be required education then? If you are advocating for nuke ownership, I would imagine that it would be majorly cost prohibitive.




No, of course not because weaponizing people more doesn't make anything safer when people are so unpredictable and dangerous. I hear so many illogical arguments when it comes to this topic it's unbelievable. There are much better and reasonable arguments then whatever it is your trying to say here.


You're missing the point. Why are people becoming more dangerous? Why are the underlying causes being ignored while an object that has been around since the US inception is always the topic? If it's so unreasonable, why did you take the time to share your thoughts? You are free to not respond at all.



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

So why are you comparing things like heart disease to guns anyway??? Just because death can result from those things??? You can die from drinking too much water too. But I wouldn't compare drinking water to any kind of manufactured weapon made for the purpose of killing things. I don't even know what it is you're trying to compare or how you'd do it. I mean on one side you have a device that has a certain purpose we've created. On the other you have an illness which could either be from a lifestyle choice or even just genetic. It's beyond even apples and oranges.

I never said only Government should have guns. But when it comes to the media, I can just not watch or change the channel. Again your comparing two things where one is an actual device and the other isn't a thing but a conceptual social construct or something. Politics isn't a physical thing like a weapon is. I just don't get what it is your saying with all this. I mean I kind of get it but not really.

Yeah, I'm sure more targets are shot than people or living things. But shooting targets is to simulate shooting something else or at least with the idea that's it's practicing to kill something should the situation arrive. I mean that's what that tool, the gun, is made for. That is it's purpose. That's why we made it. We didn't invent guns or any other weapon for any other reason than to use it as a weapon.

I don't know about weapons training being needed for everyone as some constitutional thing because not everyone wants a weapon. But certainly for anyone owning a gun then yeah, I think as long as they own it and are supposed to be responsible for it they should be trained in what that means. Like anything else, certain items or actions that people might want to be a part of, it usually comes with other training and things that must be followed and maintained or your not allowed to do them. Which is why my problem isn't with responsible gun owners. It's with the ones who aren't responsible but we seem to treat them all the same when they aren't.

I responded because I don't get what you're trying to say here. I mean I think I sorta get part of it, but not really. Which is what I just explained. Also, I know you enough and respect your input as a member that I felt it would be ok to comment. But really, I just don't follow how or why you're comparing disease to weapons or how media can literally kill me like a weapon can. Like Chris Rock once said, "when I go to the ATM at night, I'm not looking over my shoulder for the Media."



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

My point in making this thread is to put into perspective the relationship between the gun arguments, 2nd amendment and media portrayal.

By emphasizing that guns are not as critical to the narrative as would be reported, perhaps some folks and understand they opposing argument regardless if they agree.

Sure, genes, bad luck can attribute to the top causes of death but they aren't the sole cases and I dare say that threats from the organizations that we place faith in to protect and save lives are a bigger and IMO more important of a talking point and perhaps threat.

However, why aren't we talking about that? Could it be because we could actually come to a consensus and partake in actions that could have a positive result?



posted on Nov, 6 2017 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

If we were to slash Govt/politicians by 90% and revoke laws by 90% we'd be in paradise.
edit on 6-11-2017 by TheConstruKctionofLight because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 12:25 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

We do talk about that stuff though. Like pretty much all the time. Even the media talks about the problems within the media actually.

But once again, stuff like that we are actively and knowingly participating in ourselves by choice mostly too. If it wasn't something we wanted we could just ignore it all. Throw the TV away. Don't read about it online etc. But we do because it's entertainment. Although in general we should all take it and ourselves way less seriously though. Because we all know many of the games and BS behind it all, yet we allow ourselves to get all swept up in anyway.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 12:33 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

We do, yes, here. On ATS. I think it was you that pointed out elsewhere that we are not the norm. The media talks about them from their own soapbox. It's the other 'sides' fault!

We agree on the same principal, we have the choice. My point is that we need to make the choice as a society. Making the d-bags who commit these crimes famous is part and parcel of the whole problem.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 04:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI



My point is that we need to make the choice as a society. Making the d-bags who commit these crimes famous is part and parcel of the whole problem.

I've concluded that society as a whole likes this violence. Organized crime figures like Scarface Al Capone are glorified, major criminals like Bonnie & Clyde are immortalized, and large scale global warmongers like Napoleon, Temujin/Genghis Khan, & Alexander the Great are still taught about to this day. And society always talks about today's soldiers and generals as if they should be placed on a pedestal, while "war Presidents" are generally given huge support nationally.

People grew up watching Wild Westerns with shootouts and some of the most successful tv & movie series are based on violence (James Bond, the Sopranos, etc). Most of our "superheroes" win by beating up their enemies, with the edgier heroes killing their enemies. People absolutely love first person shooter games and mmorpgs where you basically get stronger & get upgrades after killing large amounts of opponents.

And this doesn't even touch on the different branches of gun culture, from hunters & militias to self defense "experts" & competitive shooters. Or many from the anti-govt branch of 2nd Amendment advocates. As Sen. Rand Paul said/tweeted (HERE):

Why do we have a Second Amendment? It's not to shoot deer. It's to shoot at the government when it becomes tyrannical!

Are we supposed to believe that he was simply referring to shooting at govt-issued paperwork?

My point is that society loves violence, just not when it hits too close to home. As long as people in general think that violence can solve our problems, this crap will continue to happen. And that goes for violent/abusive parents all the way up to pro-war political and religious leaders. But as long as things like compromise, diplomacy, and pacifism are mocked and shunned, I don't see any of this changing, even though those are all other ways to deescalate situations and solve them without the need for violence.

edit on 7-11-2017 by enlightenedservant because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 04:24 AM
link   
a reply to: enlightenedservant




My point is that society loves violence, just not when it hits too close to home. As long as people in general think that violence can solve our problems, this crap will continue to happen. And that goes for violent/abusive parents all the way up to pro-war political and religious leaders. But as long as things like compromise, diplomacy, and pacifism are mocked and shunned, I don't see any of this changing, even though those are all other ways to deescalate situations and solve them without the need for violence.


My woman and I often talk about this subject. Perhaps we are so pampered and devoid of actual violence that long forgotten are the ramifications of it. What it leads to and the mental toll it takes. The loudest cries from trivial violence or even being offended could proof testament to the theory.

Sometimes I just throw my hands in the air and say maybe we need another real Hitler or Mao to show how horrible the actuality was. Of course I don't mean it but I think the point is made.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 04:34 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

But people love war "heroes". Hitler is rightly hated by many, but there are still others who justify his actions and others who carry his banner (like literal neo-Nazis). And Mao is basically a hero to China. So maybe those weren't the best examples?

Honestly, it wouldn't matter who the examples are though. Have you seen the constant calls for large scale anti-Islam policies every time a single Muslim terrorist commits a crime? That lets me know that many people are actually hoping for a new Hitler or Mao who will permanently purge their bogeyman of the day. And there are threads right here on ATS that have called for nuclear war against China and/or North Korea.

In other words, I highly doubt that large scale violence would deter anything.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Poverty kills more people than any other cause.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: infolurker

Obviously, you do not understand the difference between fact and opinion. For you, the two words, fact and opinion are the same word.

Anytime you use the word "good" or "bad" it's an opinion not a fact.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I bring up these stats whenever people talk about terrorists too but I get called a terrorist sympathizer instead.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Same here. It let's me know where people's real priorities are. If they really cared about saving lives, they'd be pushing for high quality healthcare for all. I'd readily support a "War on Cancer" program.



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 10:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: JinMI

I bring up these stats whenever people talk about terrorists too but I get called a terrorist sympathizer instead.


I was just going to post the same thing. What I always get in response is something about Skittles.


edit on 7-11-2017 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: JinMI


JinMI, excellent post! As usual, their extremely narrow focus on gun related homicide actually works in our favor.

There are so many more causes of death, gun murders don't even rank on that chart.

Ban McDonalds, then we'll talk about lower causes. It IS all about saving lives, right? Not some weird culture war fought by jealous losers, right?



posted on Nov, 7 2017 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: JBurns

So you would agree that Muslims aren't as big an issue as the right wing media makes them out to be too right? Clearly those stats the OP presented are more important than the minuscule percentage of deaths attributed to terrorists, especially of the Muslim variety.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join