Hopefully not. I own property in Fallston which I usually just summarise as Shelby.
Charleston Church Shooting
- Thread starter West Duval Nole
- Start date
- Status
Hopefully not. I own property in Fallston which I usually just summarise as Shelby.
I've posted about it before. When I was in school, my girlfriend at the time and I were walking back to her apartment at Spanish Oaks. Two guys jumped out as we were going upstairs, as we turned around he shot the pistol and it hit her in the stomach, he then stuck the gun in my face while his friend grabbed her purse.
Hate crimes are differentiated because they don't just target a person, they target a group of people. If a member of ISIS kills a Christian pastor that crime should be punished more severely than a run of the mill murder one, because it isn't just a crime against a person, but a group of people.
I'm also not entirely sure I agree with that, but that is the argument for hate crimes.
I wouldn't say it is enlightened but an accurate estimate of risk. I feel like my chances of getting injured with an accidental discharge are much greater than the need to defend myself against an attack in church.
Dude nailed it. This after a hugely complex trial in which we endure the insanity defense and other related silliness. Lots of court-appointed attorneys, pyscho-babblers, appeals, etc.
Why can't the cops ever shoot these guys?
Ok. But if premeditated murder gets the death penalty, what does a hatecrime murder get, they can't kill him twice. Do they torture him, then kill him? I guess if the penalty for just murder can't be the death penalty but a hate crime can then I guess that makes more sense. So. a hate crime makes it a federal crime? And murder is just crime in state. So if the state doesn't have the death penalty, they can be tried in federal court and get the death penalty? Is that correct?
One of the benefits of labeling something a hate crime is it allows federal law enforcement officials to get involved. They assist with all of the information gathering from large groups that are pseudo organized and that cross state boarders. It also keeps an eye on the investigation from small town police departments that may be part of the problem as well
There's probably more nuance to this topic, but since you don't seem to be interested in it..
Saw this online "The argument that "it's part of our history" doesn't wash. South Carolina was a British colony for almost 150 years, 30x longer than it was in the CSA, yet it doesn't fly the Union Jack"
Well, surely you know that declaring a space "drug free", "gun free", " ace whole" free, etc... Is a joke. Do you really think that adding more weapons to the fire will subdue the blaze?
I removed some unneeded wording.
Last edited:
Gun owners are not given a lifetime pass. Get convicted of a felony or heck even get a domestic violence restraining order without having been convicted of any crime can get guns taken away.
And as someone already stated. Churches were gun free zones where he was, so guess what he didn't obey a law that was already on the books. Not really hard to figure out that someone willing to murder which is also against the law would be willing to break any other of a gazillion laws you want to put into law, including stealing guns. Granted that wasn't what happened here, but he broke at least 1 gun control law in committing this heinous crime.
----------
Everybody knows that gun free, drug free, speeding free, cussing free zones are self enforced. They are political jokes meant to garner election. Tiresome argument about gun free zones.
Well, when my kids started driving they had to pass a test and provide proof of liability insurance. If they eff up, they lose driving privileges.
Your boy only faces loss of privilege after the fact. Why does he not have to prove competence before? Some bull squat right of idiocy...
Why do you expect people to have to protect themselves from fools? Keep the fools from carrying.
The more guns that you want to allow people to carry, the more guns involved in death.l
And as someone already stated. Churches were gun free zones where he was, so guess what he didn't obey a law that was already on the books. Not really hard to figure out that someone willing to murder which is also against the law would be willing to break any other of a gazillion laws you want to put into law, including stealing guns. Granted that wasn't what happened here, but he broke at least 1 gun control law in committing this heinous crime.
----------
Everybody knows that gun free, drug free, speeding free, cussing free zones are self enforced. They are political jokes meant to garner election. Tiresome argument about gun free zones.
Well, when my kids started driving they had to pass a test and provide proof of liability insurance. If they eff up, they lose driving privileges.
Your boy only faces loss of privilege after the fact. Why does he not have to prove competence before? Some bull squat right of idiocy...
Why do you expect people to have to protect themselves from fools? Keep the fools from carrying.
The more guns that you want to allow people to carry, the more guns involved in death.l
First and foremost, he is not my boy anymore than he is your boy.
I agree those gun free zones are a joke. And they just happen to be where most of these types of incidents happen.
Your driving license example is perfect how many idiotic drivers do you see out there that have their dl. Plenty because they act all nice and safe and know how to drive safely but they choose not to when not being tested. A person can do the same for getting a conceal carry or just to purchase a gun. And after a first violation the license isn't revoked. They must accumulate so many points before.
There are some problems with not allowing medical and psychological history to be shared. No problems with that changing. Good luck overturning HIPAA. I would be fine if they shared that info and that registry was blocked from gun purchases too. But perhaps you see a decrease in people that need help going to see a psychiatrist if this becomes the case, but again, i have no issues with this being shared and restricted.
So regardless what laws you have on the books fools are going to be able to get their hands on guns. Whether they steal them or some other method.
The best method which would cause other problems I won't go into would be to overturn the right to bear arms. Make it illegal to make, sell, or possess firearms for anyone. Then if caught doing any of the above. Life in prison or death penalty. Is that radical? Yes. But that is what you would need to do. Then if law enforcement and military are the only ones that can have them. They should make them biometric firing ability based with gps for tracking, so only a military or police authorized biometric can fire the weapon. Then in addition since there are many guns already out there as well as materials and equipment to make more. You would have to at any public place go through airport type security to make sure no one is getting in with a gun.
Beyond that there will be ways and loopholes for someone that isn't supposed to have a gun get one and go into a place and do this.
Is that what you support? I don't as that puts way too much power in the government and would allow them to overstep their bounds with no resistance whatsoever.
What is your proposal to resolve it? Not just this case but any scenario that this could happen. If you have one, that you think could prevent this without other possible scenarios of people stealing or getting someone else to buy for them or getting as a gift.
Last edited:
There's probably more nuance to this topic, but since you don't seem to be interested in it..
Just saw a pic of this degenerate burning a U.S. flag. He was sympathetic to the South African apathard era.
He almost changed his mind after sitting with the group at the church for an hour after he saw how nice they were. Perhaps he should have spent more time in a church--- maybe this never would have happened.
The flag did not cause this. This kid did not live back then. His actions were evil and rare and would have occurred no matter the flag.
Ridiculous that everyone is using this tragedy to remove the flag. It's a flag.
Ridiculous that everyone is using this tragedy to remove the flag. It's a flag.
Very obtuse statement. That flag doesn't "cause" racism but it sure represents it. The American flag doesn't cause freedom but it stands for it, right? Any person that has a confederate flag on their car, in their yard, etc is someone I know I want nothing to do with.
And I don't want to do anything with someone who has a Gator flag. We all have our reasons. Hate is hate, right?
But seriously, this rage over the flag and using this tragedy as the excuse is what annoys me. Making SC take down the flag solves nothing and would not have prevented this.
But seriously, this rage over the flag and using this tragedy as the excuse is what annoys me. Making SC take down the flag solves nothing and would not have prevented this.
Suprised this thread has lasted. Here's my thoughts.
Kid was a racist psychopath obviously.
It scares me that people think we should give up our rights to bear arms and to have our medical records kept private. Eliminating either one of those rights is a highway to tyranny and the loss of medical privacy has a ton of unintended consequences. Someone could go through a small bit of depression and lose their whole career over it. Don't open Pandora's box. These solutions are far worse than the problem. You simply cannot prevent all bad things from happening. Shooting out legislation from the hip in emotional reaction is never a good idea and almost invariably makes the overall situation worse.
The confederate flag means things to different people. To many southerners,and the vast majority of those who display it or advocate it's display, it is a source of pride that has nothing to do with racism. That some people choose to remain ignorant of this and only see it as racist punks like this kid want is not sufficient reason to remove it or disparage it. I wish that the Sons of Confederate Veterens and others were more succesful in showing what it means to most of us, though it is a tough battle against the tide of ignorance that sees it as symbol of hate while ignoring the fact that the hate groups that use it that way also use the American flag and Christian cross the same exact way.
Kid was a racist psychopath obviously.
It scares me that people think we should give up our rights to bear arms and to have our medical records kept private. Eliminating either one of those rights is a highway to tyranny and the loss of medical privacy has a ton of unintended consequences. Someone could go through a small bit of depression and lose their whole career over it. Don't open Pandora's box. These solutions are far worse than the problem. You simply cannot prevent all bad things from happening. Shooting out legislation from the hip in emotional reaction is never a good idea and almost invariably makes the overall situation worse.
The confederate flag means things to different people. To many southerners,and the vast majority of those who display it or advocate it's display, it is a source of pride that has nothing to do with racism. That some people choose to remain ignorant of this and only see it as racist punks like this kid want is not sufficient reason to remove it or disparage it. I wish that the Sons of Confederate Veterens and others were more succesful in showing what it means to most of us, though it is a tough battle against the tide of ignorance that sees it as symbol of hate while ignoring the fact that the hate groups that use it that way also use the American flag and Christian cross the same exact way.
Well thought out reply and I apologize for calling him your boy.
There is obviously no law that will change the ongoing climate of violence in our society. This change has to come from the way we view and treat our fellows. We cannot move forward in a positive way without truly addressing the disconnects in our world. Poverty, lack of real opportunity, endless wars, fear of others (racism), power struggles for limited resources, etc...
What we can do as a society is to stop acting like carrying a piece is going to solve anything. It is a symptom of sickness. We have to treat each other with dignity and respect and call out the bad apples at every situation. Teach our kids and adults that we can't shoot our way out of this situation and look for ways to treat each other the way we wish to be treated.[/QUOTE]
That was a well thought out response. I disagree on the premise that African Americans had as much a role in building the South and its history and majority of them are against the display of the confederate flag on govt property. Re: other symbols on govt property, probably beyond the scope of this thread
Fair enough. Part of my perspective comes from when I was a child growing up it was quite common to see southern black people as well as white people proudly display the flag.
I support burning the Confederate Flag. Always thought that was the best use for it.
So you'd be OK with a Nazi swastika flag flying in New York City... the Jews living there would just have to deal with it, it's only a flag. Right?
"As a people, we are fighting to maintain the heaven ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race"- William Tappan Thompson, designer of the Confederate battle flag.
The proponents of the confederate battle flag have to be one of, if not the the most obviously disingenuous groups of people on one side of any debate, ever.
From now on, if you're in favor of keeping the CBF, you're either colossally stupid, or racist.
Put them in all the confederate and US History museums you want, categorize them as symbols of hate, and make their display outside of a museum illegal.
From now on, if you're in favor of keeping the CBF, you're either colossally stupid, or racist.
Put them in all the confederate and US History museums you want, categorize them as symbols of hate, and make their display outside of a museum illegal.
There are plenty of exceptions to freedom of speech, let's not mount another disingenuous argument on top of the existing disingenuous arguments already in this thread.
So if Japanese Americans take offense to the U.S. Flag for their treatment during World War 2, does that mean the U.S. Flag should be banned too?
And no I don't own any confederate flag, nor would I fly it or own any clothing or anything else with it.
But you really start walking a fine line on what can and can not be displayed on your own private property based on whether or not offends a group of people. And yes that even includes a majority of people.
Your wanting it to be illegal for any person to display it, even if on their own private property. That is quite different than arguing that there is no state or government institution that should display it. Their are plenty of hate groups out there that are allowed to display their ignorance without it being illegal. We can't just start picking and choosing which things we disagree with as being illegal.
Maybe it's time we start re-evaluating at our willingness to 'allow' hate groups to do as they please under the guise of freedom of speech, association and privacy rights?
Your Japanese argument is a strawman and you know it. Not even remotely close to being comparable.
It's not that 'some people' find it offensive. It is an offensive symbol, period. I'm not talking about outlawing anything that 'some people' find offensive. That should be abundantly clear.
Your Japanese argument is a strawman and you know it. Not even remotely close to being comparable.
It's not that 'some people' find it offensive. It is an offensive symbol, period. I'm not talking about outlawing anything that 'some people' find offensive. That should be abundantly clear.
- Status
