Reply With Quote
This is actually pretty good
Nope. the media is to blame for everything.
Lazy answers are the best answers.
Case closed.
This is actually pretty good
Theres no way with 4,000 media outlets plus people would go to wherever the info was a read it there.
Last edited by AaronY; 02-25-2018 at 01:06 AM.
"To protect the second amendment, we must do away with the first."
-- ST Patriot Militia
I won't dismiss it outright, but I'd like to see more hard data on that.
So the only logical thing to do is kill Uwe Boll.
For a while the media was censored to post caskets of returning dead soldiers too, in order to, largely, quell any anti-war sentiments. Debatable how well that really worked.
It's bad enough when we know everything we do about a guy like Paddock -- imagine the rumor mongering and bat conspiracies if the general public was not allowed to know his name.
Did I write that?
What don't you understand about teachers also grading on weekdays as well?
This, again, shows the ignorance of old white guy who has no clue as to how others might work.
Keep going, please...
It's difficult to find hard data on any of the suggestions since the shooters are often killed or they off themselves in the process. There's certainly a level of sensationalism tied to mass killings vs any other deaths (like if the same 17 students were killed in a bus accident). The difference then isn't the students, but the shooter. They want to focus on that individual because it sells.
Is it a coincidence that these events are all basically being carried out by the same types of people, loners with troubled pasts who are also heavily into how cool they look with a firearm? Typically white males with lower middle class upbringing. The Columbine effect, using the term "Trenchcoat Mafia" and having video games that require you to basically go on a shooting spree in malls and such... this has become an industry. You just watch the clock for the next idiot to ring the "I want to be famous, might as well kill everyone I oppose" bell.
Why yes you did Sparky. It's quoted from your post.
Yes.
The student read x(Y) as X times (read as multiplied by) Y ya knuckle head.
You have again made a fool of yourself.
Call Bull again Mr. Crutchfield.
Bifurcation is your strong suit.
There's a lot of space between knowing a name and an and endless stream of biography.
Your flaccid attempt is duly noted though.
OK, tell us how you would want the Paddock case handled in particular.
Go right ahead. Be specific so I don't get a chance to misrepresent your call to action.
^I highly doubt anyone here knows what the you're on about.
You never saw it until you witnessed it. That was rich.
Do it again, Mr Berra.
"The shooter was identified as Stephen Paddock."
"The shooter was identified as Dylan Roof"
Instead of
"This is the 2nd most deaths in a mass shooting event in the US" Followed by a seeding chart of mass shooters
Notice they don't go into a biography about non-sensational killings.
So how would you stop any other information from being released?
You got shat on and now you do the old white shuffle per usual. The weekend, as in you have a lot of time and her husband can help. Do you understand context. Even if you don't, is so stupidly rigid of you and your thoughts. Again, you know exactly what I'm writing and you wanna riggle out.
What you CALL is useless.
As far as video games go, that's certainly an area that has been fairly extensively researched and the results come back that they're actually not conducive to that. People can largely distinguish between reality and fiction. It would indicate banning/censoring video games would have minimal impact.
That's what I mean about hard data. It doesn't matter if the shooter offed himself or got killed, we can certainly have some research on the impact of releasing his full bio and how that affects potential copycats. I haven't seen extensive research about that, but I'd love to see it.
I didn't blame the police.
Are you even American?
The research routinely states that mass shootings don't occur frequently enough given the population to make an scientifically sound correlations. However we're speculating.
It's not about releasing his bio. The term "release" is a neutral offering. The media loops it, they don't "release" it. I suppose the Russians released false information instead of spamming the out of it. If that could sway an election, why can't it sway an already unstable mind?
Saw it.
Can you see a lemon in your head? I'm mean picture it in your head?
Dumbass got snagged.
Anyone knows what the im going on about?...
I just posted to a lady who sent me links to math books ya stupid weasel. Just because you wander in to the middle of the movie and ask what's going on, does not mean the intended audience is as lost as you are.
You're Avante's relative, aren't you, ya half pint. ok? Ok? yeah you bet.. buddy.
Says the guy who writes articles for Time magazine and is interested in quantum entanglement...
When you dive too deep, you scrape bottom.
Its a Russian saying.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
