Madkal posted:

Counterpoint: they shouldn't be easily available because it just gives the killer more exposure, could inspire more people to be like the killer and adds nothing of value to society. It doesn't have anything that the public needs to see or know about.

gurragadon posted:

Because people deserve information, and people who read these manifestos deserve to be rightfully upset that there loved one's died for such pointless reasons. They don't have to read them if they don't want to, but they should be able to easily.

gurragadon posted:

People deserve to know their children are dying for pure nonsense

Baronash posted:

The reasons are obviously pointless. None of us need to read someone's journal to know that their reasons for killing a bunch of kids are pointless.

And more importantly, releasing info like that just serves to reinforce the power fantasies of the next person to walk into a school and start shooting because (among many other, equally insane reasons) they see it as their way to be heard.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

Are there people who currently think otherwise?

"Yes, it's scary to think my children might be terrorized and brutally destroyed in a suicidal assault on their classroom, but at least I take some comfort in knowing that it would help the killer promote an important message that we all need to hear." Nobody thinks this - school shooters are already discredited on the basis that they are school shooters.

I really can't imagine a less universal belief among Americans than "school shooters don't have any good reason to shoot up schools."

gurragadon posted:

It is a way to be heard in this country. It's a terrible way to be heard but it is a form of being heard in this country. I can't say their reasons are obviously pointless without knowing. The fake rationale they put up in defense of their reasons should be known so they can be looked out for.

quote:

I just think that when information is made fully available it better serves the public.

quote:

I truly don't believe people know the pure absurdity of the rationale in some of these manifestos. When they talk about internet memes and Sam Hyde and poo poo like that. Like I think everyone thinks and knows their reason is stupid, I just don't think they know how stupid and pointless it is.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

If the idea is, "we need these manifestos available because they help us identify and save people who might enter the same psychological spiral," that's a good reason to make them available to the public.

This is a good reason to make them available to the public.

This is completely ridiculous. The vast majority of us already know that mass shootings are 100% stupid and 100% pointless. If anyone thinks "maybe that murder spree wasn't totally stupid and pointless" then they don't need to read the manifesto, they need urgent psychological assistance, because they're deeply unwell.

bird food bathtub posted:

I'm all for damnatio memoriae on mass shooters. Don't publish their names, their manifestos, nothing. If you want to publish something about the tragedies concentrate on the victims. Put out stories about how a six year old went from learning to ride bikes for the first time to decorating the wall with their grey matter. Stop encouraging other mass murderers to seek the attention they get, focus it on the people paying the price for our hosed up society.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

Are there people who currently think otherwise?

quote:

Asked whether there was a role for Congress to play in preventing tragedies that are exceedingly common in the US while being exceedingly rare in the rest of the world, Burchett responded: “I don’t see any real role that we could do other than mess things up, honestly … I don’t think you’re going to stop the gun violence. I think you got to change people’s hearts. You know, as a Christian, as we talk about in the church, and I’ve said this many times, I think we really need a revival in this country.”

PT6A posted:

I dunno, a lot of the loudest and worst Christians (the sort who say we need a Revival) are pretty incoherent themselves.

Civilized Fishbot posted:

If anyone thinks "maybe that murder spree wasn't totally stupid and pointless" then they don't need to read the manifesto, they need urgent psychological assistance, because they're deeply unwell.

gurragadon posted:

Yeah, it seems like they are going to release the manifesto of the shooter Audrey Hale eventually.

https://www.msn.com/en-za/news/crim...lic/ar-AA19gj6Q

I think it's pretty important to get the writing or video or whatever out into the public though. Half of these "manifestos" are total nonsense, and the public deserves to know why their family, friends and neighbors are dying.

A side note, if you find yourself writing a manifesto and you're not Karl Marx, you should probably seek psychiatric help.

bird food bathtub posted:

We've been publishing their names and manifestos, spreading their faces and actions across the evening news for 30 or more years now. Try something different, maybe? OK sure if you want the stuff available for clinical research yeah I can agree to that I guess. It should not be riding high on the top of Twitter. We, The People, don't need and can't use that poo poo. It has not and will not improve anything. In public they should be faceless, nameless murderers that caused Mary Smith to no longer be able to volunteer down at the Humane Society every Sunday like she has been for the last twenty years.

Stop giving them the attention they want.

Stop rewarding them for murdering innocent people.

Mooseontheloose posted:

Your in a damned if you do damned if you don't situation though. Not releasing materials looks like you are hiding something and people fill in the blanks with their biases. Doing it obviously leads to emboldening people, gives credence to the violence. HOW the media reports this stuff is important as we know from everything from Columbine to now, for years the narrative was losers who loved their video games and come to find out they were relatively popular kids in who may of been involved with the white supremacist movement.

Zamujasa posted:

Releasing a manifesto can be done in a way that doesn't hyper-publicize it (it can be in an article somewhere without being blasted across every 24/7 news channel for a week), but that requires the powers that be to actually exercise restraint and not go for What Gets Clicks/Ratings, so that's out.

quote:

However, having liberally construed the complaint as we must at this stage of the pleading process, we find the complaint states a cause of action for assault against the individual defendants and one of the religious institutions. Therefore, we must reverse the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ allegation of assault and affirm the court in all other respects.

quote:

Likewise, a police investigation launched in 2012 found the allegations against Perry "were sustained," according to a police department spokesperson, but that statute of limitations had passed.

"The alleged sexual battery was reported to have occurred when the victim was between the ages of 11 and 14," said Nashville police department spokesperson Don Aaron in a statement to BuzzFeed News.

"As a result of the investigation, the allegations of sexual battery were sustained, but it was determined that the statute of limitations had tolled, barring prosecution. The victim was age 18 when she first disclosed the allegations to non-law enforcement and said at that time she did not want the matter reported to the Tennessee Department of Children's Services or the police."

quote:

Why do Americans own AR-15s?

The AR-15 is the best-selling rifle in the United States, industry figures indicate. Almost every major gunmaker now produces its own version of the weapon, which dominates gun dealers’ walls and websites.

Critics claim that the military-style gun has no legitimate civilian use — yet about 1 in 20 Americans own one. So who chooses to buy an AR-15, and why?

The Washington Post and Ipsos asked nearly 400 AR-15 owners to explain their reasons for having the weapon, what they use it for and how often they fire it.

The survey found that AR-15 owners come from red, blue and purple states. Compared with Americans as a whole, AR-15 owners are significantly more likely to be White, male and between the ages 40 and 65. They’re also more likely to have higher incomes, to have served in the military and to be Republican. And AR-15 owners are more likely to live in states former president Donald Trump won in 2020 than adults overall.

Self-defense was the most popular reason for owning an AR-15. Other popular answers included recreation, target shooting and hunting, while some pointed to owning an AR-15 as their Second Amendment right.

The Post-Ipsos poll is one of the most detailed nationally representative surveys to date focused on the opinions of AR-15 owners.

The gun industry estimates there are about 20 million AR-15s in circulation. There is no way to independently confirm that number, but polling can estimate how many Americans own them.

National surveys by Ipsos in 2022 found that 31 percent of adults own guns. The Post-Ipsos survey of AR-15 owners estimates that 20 percent of gun owners own an AR-15-style rifle. Taken together, the polls find that 6 percent of Americans own an AR-15, about 1 in 20.

The data suggests that with a U.S. population of 260.8 million adults, about 16 million Americans own an AR-15.

“To ensure I would not be outgunned if I had to defend my family and property with the rate that society is going.” A 52-year-old man said.

quote:

Self defense/Protect home/self/family - 33

Fun/Recreation/Sport or hobby shooting - 15

Target shooting/Take to range/Competition - 15

Second Amendment/It’s my right/Because I can - 12

Hunting - 12

Like the way it looks/Like it/Because I want to - 9

Easy to use/Simple/Accurate - 6

Used one in the military/as a police officer/Use for work - 4

Customizable/Platform/Versatile - 4

In case of chaos/Government tyranny - 3

Was a gift/Inherited it - 2

Collection/Collector - 2

Angers liberals/Because people want to ban them/Because they make other people afraid - 2

Other - 5

No answer - 2

cat botherer posted:

https://twitter.com/DavidJollyFL/status/1641119107696455680

quote:

In its environmental analysis for the current lease sale, the Biden administration estimated the oil and gas drilling from this sale could emit about 21.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide.

Biden climate policy continues to go just great. This auction was part of the inflation reduction act, but this sale apparently goes beyond its requirements.

Doctor Yiff posted:

One reason to make it available is it allows people to have some evidence to point to to at least attempt to counter the chudosphere's claims that the shooting was caused by gender ideology terrorism or whatever.

XboxPants posted:

Yes, absolutely. There are many people who think that people do this because they are bad people, that they're evil. That it's some sort of moral failing. This leads to a sort of moral panic, and a general feeling that we need to tighten down the moral control of society. You can see this in the quote from Rep. Tim Burchett from a couple pages back:

In reality, while their acts are certainly evil, when you read these manifestos you get the distinct impression that they have completely lost touch with reality. Can't barely hold a coherent thought. No amount of teaching good Christian values to them would have helped.

koolkal posted:

Who are these onlookers that need people to factcheck Greene for the 50th time about whatever insane poo poo she's saying?

koolkal posted:

Who are these onlookers that need people to factcheck Greene for the 50th time about whatever insane poo poo she's saying?

koolkal posted:

Who are these onlookers that need people to factcheck Greene for the 50th time about whatever insane poo poo she's saying?

quote:

WASHINGTON — Speaker Kevin McCarthy said Thursday that House Republicans are prepared to pass their own debt ceiling bill if President Joe Biden won't agree to negotiate with him over raising the nation's borrowing limit.

He said the Republican conference is “very close” to agreement on the issue. “And if the president doesn’t act, we will.”

McCarthy said a House debt ceiling bill would reflect the contours of his letter to Biden earlier this week that proposed a borrowing limit extension with provisions to cut and cap discretionary spending, recapturing unspent Covid relief funds, new work requirements for federal benefits and energy and border legislation.

McCarthy's remarks represent a significant twist in the stalemate over the debt ceiling. It is the first time he has said the GOP-led House can act on its own to avert default, in response to Biden saying that paying the country's bills is non-negotiable and that he won't grant Republicans any policy concessions for it.

The Republican speaker has previously insisted on negotiations and avoided saying the House would act without Biden's buy-in. He oversees a slim majority and would have a difficult time passing a debt limit bill with only Republican votes. That bill would then be sent to the Democratic-controlled Senate, and need Biden’s signature to become law.

“We have been reasonable, responsible, asked to sit down with the president for months. He is making the decision that he wants to put the economy in jeopardy. I don’t know what more I can do,” McCarthy said. “I would bring the lunch to the White House. I would make it soft food if that’s what he wants. It doesn’t matter.”

Does McCarthy have the votes?

Still, some lawmakers doubt that Republicans can go it alone in the House.

Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla., the chair of the House Rules Committee, said Republicans will “absolutely” need some Democratic votes to get any debt limit bill passed through the closely divided chamber.

“We need some restraints on spending," he said. "And Democrats — the only place they seem to want to restrain spending is in defense. And the only place we want to spend is in defense, and obviously veterans. So, again, two sides have to sit down and craft a deal."

In response to McCarthy's letter earlier this week, White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said Biden “welcomes a separate conversation” about budget policy, but not linked to paying the bills that Congress has legally imposed on the country.

“It’s time for Republicans to stop playing games, pass a clean debt ceiling bill and quit threatening our economic recovery,” she said.

Democratic leaders are supporting Biden’s position, saying Congress should pass a “clean” debt limit bill with no strings attached and negotiate spending policy separately on a government funding bill.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said there’s nothing for Democrats to negotiate with until Republicans craft a plan and prove they have the votes in the House to pass it.

"He doesn’t name anything specific at all. So if they were to sit down, you’d have to ask yourself, what are Speaker McCarthy and President going to talk about — the weather?" Schumer told reporters earlier this week. "We have a plan. We want to pass the debt ceiling without hostage taking without brinksmanship, just get it done like we’ve done under both Presidents [Donald] Trump and Biden. They still don’t have a plan."

Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., said that if Democrats wanted a clean debt limit increase, they should have passed it last year while they had control of Congress.

"Joe Biden could have had his clean debt ceiling six months ago. He chose not to do that. So now, FAFO," Donalds said Thursday, using an acronym for the phrase "f--- around and find out." "Now he's got to deal with House Republicans. And we're gonna work we are going to make sure that we reform and cut unnecessary spending to get our country back on track."

Mellow Seas posted:

Meatball posted:

The people who didn't see or hear the first 49 times.

Space Cadet Omoly posted:

Spree shooters are assholes and it sucks that we keep giving these dumb fucks fifteen minutes of fame.

You don't need to know their name, you don't need to know their rambling pointless thoughts, the only thing about them that matters is that they had access to a gun and that's the thing people should focus on because making it harder for lovely assholes to get guns is the only thing that's going to stop this from happening over and over again.

Doctor Yiff posted:

The point isn't to reason with them, it's to demonstrate to onlookers that they're full of poo poo.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Biden is still refusing to negotiate over the debt ceiling and McCarthy says that Republicans will just pass their own debt ceiling bill with all the cuts they want over and over until the Senate accepts and Biden signs it. McCarthy says they won't send a clean bill to raise the debt ceiling and will try to blame the Senate for a default until Biden agrees to negotiate or accepts their bill.

McCarthy had previously said that the House Republicans would not be offering their own specifics for spending cuts. McCarthy says this is proof that Republicans will not allow default and if a default occurs, then it is because the Senate and Biden did not accept their bill to raise the debt ceiling.

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1641522675926310915

Main Paineframe posted:

It's self-evidently full of poo poo. Nobody seriously thinks trans people are shooting up schools for the sake of "gender ideology". It very clearly doesn't make any sort of sense.

In any case, the far right is happy to dismiss mass shooters' manifestos, websites, social media profiles, and any other evidence that doesn't fit their narrative.