Why are there so many shootings in the US? (Split from Five Dead in LV)

Have fun John. I'm done before I get suspended for asking a question about bed linens.

Quote: Buzzard

Babs darlin " People just want to be accepted, to be part of a community, to be productive, to have friends, family, to live their life with some purpose."

STRAIGHT PEOPLE THAT IS ! John don't want no gays. NO WAY

I mentioned in my OP that I have three friends that are gay. One I met when I was 14. He was 23 . I was a sophomore in high school and he was a brother that taught there. He befriended me. I didn't fit in at this all boys Catholic school. I wasn't into sports. My friends all went to public school but my mother thought that a private school would be more academic. I grew to love Brother Joe. I got attached to him and we occasionally got together outside of school. My mom knew how much I liked him.

Brother Joe took a vow to be there for all people and not fall into personal relationships that would cause him to focus on any individual, so he cooled his relationship with me. I did not understand this and one day between classes he told me why he had become aloof towards me. I wept. We were friends for the next couple years until I graduated but didn't really hang out as before. Four years after I graduated my mom died and I went to his monastery to visit him. After this he moved to Florida to become a Father. We exchanged a few letters over the next year or so and then drifted apart.

Then some five years later he came back go California. We went out to dinner and he told me he was gay. I had never known or imagined that this was true. He told me that some 14 years earlier when he met my mom that she looked at him and knew he was gay but knew that I would be alright.

Just the other day I talked to Joe. I mentioned that story and told him that I think he THOUGHT my mom knew he was gay but that I'd be alright. It really doesn't matter. She certainly never hinted at any concern over our relationship. Joe is no longer a Catholic brother but I often refer to him as Brother Joe. I don't "blame" Joe for what he is. I love him. He's my friend.

I've said it before, what's important is that we respond to kindness. I don't care who you are, if you help me or are kind to me, I appreciate it, and I appreciate you.

Quote: Buzzard

" I can't recall mentioning blacks or minorities at all in this thread "

" Look at the crowd scenes at the I've Got A Dream speech. People were dressed in good taste and nobody wore their pants below their butts. "

Were you talking about white folks in that crowd ?

The way you have framed my two statements makes it look like you're pointing out a clear example of where I DID mention blacks in this thread. But this is exactly the only time and I already stated this example as being my response to your "drinking fountain" statement. Anyone that looks at our exchanges starting on page 8 can see this.

To answer your question, no I wasn't. You made a statement about the fact that 60 years ago blacks could not drink from white drinking fountains. You were obviously pointing out how things were unfair and demeaning for blacks back then. So I referenced my next statement in a black context to state how in black culture there was a certain dignity and respect that was evident in decades past that isn't evident today--my blacks dressed in good taste and didn't wear their pants below their butts statement at the I've Got A Dream speech. This was a compliment to the black community, before they allowed themselves to be hijacked by hip hop culture and gangsta rap.

Are you suggesting that I, as a white man, can't make observations about how black culture has gone down hill in the past 60 years? And it's funny, you have just assumed that I'm white; as though only a white guy could have said the things I've said in this thread. I don't recall ever mentioning my ethnicity.

Three times I asked you to support your statement that I wanted to go back to the good old days where blacks and minorities were not uppity. All that you were able to come up with is to avoid the question twice and on the third inquiry you finally said, essentially, come on, you know you want to go back to the good old days of 50 years ago (and so for a third time you did not mention let alone support your contention that I wanted to "return to the good old days when blacks and minorities weren't uppity"). The reason I kept asking you to support your allegation is because it was baseless and I wanted to call you on it.

When every person who chose to streak back in the 70's got their 15-30 seconds of fame, others decided to do the same. The policy eventually shifted towards not showing those fools and it happens less, even though there are still incidents of people running onto the playing surface in almost every sport.

Once it wasn't an attention grabber, less people did it.

Though homicide rates in general are down, the major shooting events grab tons of coverage for days upon days. The murderers are given lives and personalities with all the "he was a good kid; all he did was play video games in a darkened basement" crap and parents having no idea what their darling child was doing. People develop empathy with the killers and the parents in many cases. We try to find out what is wrong with the ones who don't do us a favor and kill themselves; it is always someone else's fault because they were bullied, abused, or something.

The 24 hour news cycle does this to us. They have to cover something and these events give them many story angles for a long period of time. The killers are often in the news long after their victims disappear from sight. I say cover the event, never mention the killer by name, and certainly don't give them any more air time than is necessary.

Quote: Buzzard

Babs darlin " People just want to be accepted, to be part of a community, to be productive, to have friends, family, to live their life with some purpose."

STRAIGHT PEOPLE THAT IS ! John don't want no gays. NO WAY

My girlfriend, of which I wrote about in My Blackjack Story And Other Musings, had a relationship that lasted about seven years. After our first few dates she introduced me to something she loved. Singing. We got into the Karaoke circuit. We sure loved it. She had a nice voice. She was a good dancer too. Drinks, dinner and dancing. We had lots of good times.

On the Karaoke circuit I met my third gay friend. He and I sang the same kinds of songs. He loves music. He has a few thousand CDs. Sinatra, Lena Horn, Julie London, Mel Torme.

I've known Enrique for 15 years. I do handyman work for him. I built some bookshelves for him to hold his thousands of albums and CDs. Nothing elaborate, pine 1 by 10s and nails.

He recently bought a new grand piano.

Nice guy. Can't fix a thing. Get together with him a couple of times a year.

Don't sing Karaoke much at all anymore. Neither does he.

Sarah Vaughn. Patsy Cline. Doris Day--she has a beautiful voice.

Enrique and I also share a love of old movies. If I feel like talking about Capucine, Enrique's the guy to call.

Morality:

A woman raises her daughter as a single mom. Her daughter is the center of her universe. She loves the child and coddles her. Up early every day. Breakfast, new outfits, gives her attention, games, coloring books, dance lessons, helps with home work. Hugs, affection--there for everything.

But the mother can't let go.

A parents' job is to love a child, but be strong and guide that child to one day leave the nest. All that love which wants to hold the child near, should also let the child fly free. Once a child sees this the love of the mother will become even more apparent, and the child will hopefully become independent and strong.

If a child is loved by a mother but the mother can't let go, then the love is corrupt, it is selfish.

Sigh.

Plenty of parents in the 90s and 00s over-corrected for the way their parents treated them. My Dad was very distant with me, and I didn't like it, so I was am close to my daughter. The disrespect kids have for authority spawns from the way parents treat authority. Don't forget that the 60s and 70s were all about rises against authority. My Dad was old school - the teacher is always right, your boss is always right, while my mother questioned the ability of the teacher but kept it to herself.

Parents these days will side with the child if they feel that he/she is being slighted by the teacher, because parents realize that teachers and other authority figures are humans and are subject to failure. We had an inkling and cognizance when we grew up that teachers and other authority figures were wrong, and we passed that value to our children who don't respect authority unless they deserve respect, from who they are, not simply by the position.

Society has moved backwards in many ways but has moved forward in other ways. The internet and mass media has diversified to the point where most lifestyles are acceptable, where most opinions can be validly countered, and norms are clouded. But the internet also is a feedback mechanism that allows extreme behaviour to develop unchecked. If you're feeling suicidal, you can find thousands of sites of other suicidal people yet you ignore the sites that give help for those who are suicidal. If you're feeling violent, there are thousands of ways you can procure a gun and ignore all of the anger management web sites that are out there.

I'm not blaming the internet for extreme behaviour, but the internet and mass media can provide validation for your feelings when intervention is required.

Quote: boymimbo

Sigh.

<snip>

I'm not blaming the internet for extreme behaviour, but the internet and mass media can provide validation for your feelings when intervention is required.

Why not? It is an echo chamber, just as you've said in well-crafted detail. It is the price of freedom of speech that the vilest ideas find resonance in willing hearts and minds. Strength in numbers takes on a whole new meaning when you can join a hate group of hundreds or thousands, just by Googling. Terrorist events are coordinated on it. Undetectable murders are researched on it. Sexual predators have the largest field of prey in history. Thieves and pranksters disrupt our money, our communications, our lives just for the fun of it.

The internet has grown up. But the people who use it haven't. Juvenile or twisted; mentally ill or devious; bigoted or avaricious. It's a level playing field with few warnings when any Joe Blow can be heard for the price of a connection. The sooner we as a community figure this out, the sooner we can devise better ways of mitigating it. We're going to have to take a huge collective social leap to catch up with the technology advances, or there won't be a community left.

Sorry to sound so dire, but I think the full impact of this information and communication explosion hasn't been realized yet, and I think it will take decades if not hundreds of years to sort it back into civil discourse. I can't think of one area of my life that hasn't been affected somehow by the internet/communication explosion, and not by a little bit. I think it's the same for nearly everyone in the modern world.

I fail to see how the mere ability to communicate alters the choices people make in their actions.

The Santa Barbara shooter had a car, a car camera, access to chat rooms and video boards and chose to drive up and down the streets randomly shooting at pretty young girls. He could have chosen an attempt to cure cancer, a trip to hose down cages at an animal shelter, a stint as server at some church's Senior Dinner, a trip to a bar to bump his chin on the footrail, anything.

He could have changed his social skills, instead he killed his roommates. He could have accepted some obvious facts about himself, instead he put extra ammunition in his car.

Did he lack control over his behavior? Of course not. He selected good knives, he loaded the ammunition correctly, he chose very pretty girls to shoot at. As with everyone else, he did what he chose to do. And was perfectly free to choose something else.

Absolutely, though, it does. For example, the ability for me to read on my own about schizophrenia allowed me to properly pre-diagnose the condition to a loved one and get her the help that she needed. I was able to reach out to the coordinator of a local mental health group who gave me the precise advice I needed. I used the ability to communicate to follow an route that was extremely helpful and saved a family member's life whereas the prevailing advice from other family members was to let her go.

Similarly, the suicidal teen has the choice to find ways to die, via pills, aphyxsiation, jumping off bridges, etc or has the ability to chat live online with a suicide prevention person. The teen can join others who are feeling the same way to validate their crappy feelings and get the validation and push to kill themselves or they can navigate elsewhere to a site that can save their life.

The Santa Barbara's shooter's actions could have been validated by other people's similar actions and by validating the crappy feelings he was feelings via the internet.

The internet allows a forum where somewhere, you'll be accepted. Hear voices in your head? There's a group of believers who will tell you that the voices are real and should be heeded. Don't believe in Global Warming? Lots of sites to validate your feelings and thoughts and to reinforce your view? Looking to build a bomb or take revenge out on your fellow man? Lots of places for that and lots of sites where people are expressing the same negativity that you're feeling. the alternative is true as well. You can find sites that will tell you to seek mental help if you're hearing voices, that will tell you the reasons why climate change is probably real, and places where you can feel better about yourself. It's all out there, and indeed, it's your choice on what you seek.

Pre-internet, there was no place for that. You relied on the telephone and actual people in your network. You would never pick up the phone and deliver a message in 140 characters or less. You would never be able to broadcast to 150 of your Facebook friends how you are feeling.

This message will be viewed by mayhaps 100 people and maybe it will affect somebody. I never had this forum 20 years ago. I'm lucky enough to have a fascination for facts and to have the analytical firepower to separate fact from fiction. Yet I believe in God (a Christian one to boot) despite the fact that there is absolutely no proof and continue to gamble relentlessly knowing that I will be beat. I'm not perfect too, but I have found groups of people (Church, this forum) to validate my beliefs.