10 dead & 3 wounded in MASS SHOOTING in Buffalo, NY /racist targeted Blacks/* DOJ seeks the Death penalty

[Professor Emeritus]

I was pretty clear with what I said,

"ANTI-BLACK TERRORIST ATTACK"

that means you do not talk about:

gun control
POCs
immigration
thoughts and prayers
etc...

You lied. You said the Dems couldn't mention that it was an anti-black terrorist attack, now that I showed you that Biden did it, you're moving the goalposts to something arbitrary and ridiculous.


What would be the point of such a stupid-ass rule that you suddenly created on the spot other than just to push a "both sides" agenda?


* Gun control is discussed after EVERY shooting....but now it suddenly can't be part of the discussion?

* One of the victims herself just wrote a letter to the newspaper asking for gun control....but you want to shyt on the desires of the victims to push your own agenda?

* The killer himself said anti-immigration was one of his main motivating factors....but we can't talk about that.

* The killer himself said that he was against POC of many races....but we can't talk about that.



Talking about a mass shooting but not being allowed to discuss the killer's motivations or possible countermeasures is just stupid. Can you imagine saying, "When you talk about Putin's war against Ukraine, you can ONLY talk about how much Putin hates Ukrainians. You can't talk about Putin's greater goals, it's not allowed. You can't talk about sanctions against Putin or blocking his access to resources, it's not allowed. ONLY anti-Ukraine discussion is allowed, or I might turn on you and support Putin instead!"

:doh:

 

[Tair]

You lied. You said the Dems couldn't mention that it was an anti-black terrorist attack, now that I showed you that Biden did it, you're moving the goalposts to something arbitrary and ridiculous.


What would be the point of such a stupid-ass rule that you suddenly created on the spot other than just to push a "both sides" agenda?


* Gun control is discussed after EVERY shooting....but now it suddenly can't be part of the discussion?

* One of the victims herself just wrote a letter to the newspaper asking for gun control....but you want to shyt on the desires of the victims to push your own agenda?

* The killer himself said anti-immigration was one of his main motivating factors....but we can't talk about that.

* The killer himself said that he was against POC of many races....but we can't talk about that.



Talking about a mass shooting but not being allowed to discuss the killer's motivations or possible countermeasures is just stupid. Can you imagine saying, "When you talk about Putin's war against Ukraine, you can ONLY talk about how much Putin hates Ukrainians. You can't talk about Putin's greater goals, it's not allowed. You can't talk about sanctions against Putin or blocking his access to resources, it's not allowed. ONLY anti-Ukraine discussion is allowed, or I might turn on you and support Putin instead!"

:doh:

"We have to refuse to live in a country where Black people are gunned down shopping for groceries"

=/=

"We must end anti-Black terrorism."

I didn't lie, you just misinterpreted what I posted.

Payton had "n$gger" on the barrel of his gun. He had "here's your reparations" on the side of his gun.

He drove 200 miles to kill Black people, not immigrants, not Latinos, and not Jewish people. So why would we need to include them?

The Dems could have done more on gun control in 2012 when the Sandy Hook massacre occured. They didn't.

And you are naive if you really think they want to do something about gun control. It is only a tactic to pivot away from the anti-Black terrorist attack. They will not push nor pass any meaningful gun regulation. They only want to keep mentioning it so as to drown out a much needed Black agenda.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

"We have to refuse to live in a country where Black people are gunned down shopping for groceries"

=/=

"We must end anti-Black terrorism."

No one is going to take that level of hair-splitting seriously when the other side is directly inspiring the anti-black terrorists.

He drove 200 miles to kill Black people, not immigrants, not Latinos, and not Jewish people. So why would we need to include them?

Because HE included them. He explicitly bytched about immigration and said in his manifesto that he hated non-White people in general. He literally said that the Muslim-killer from Chirstchurch was his direct inspiration.

You do realize that this is at least the 4th "Great Replacement Theory" mass shooting, right? The first one killed 11 Jews. The second one killed 51 Muslims. The third one killed 23 Latinos. And this one killed 10 Black folk. The second, third, and fourth ones were EXPLICITLY unified to the point that they even copied passages from each other's manifestos. And you're bytching about the media making a connection between those events?

The Dems could have done more on gun control in 2012 when the Sandy Hook massacre occured. They didn't.

Yeah, there was this little thing called "Republican control of the House" and "conservative majority on the Supreme Court" that made that kind of hard. You know that, right?

And you are naive if you really think they want to do something about gun control. It is only a tactic to pivot away from the anti-Black terrorist attack. They will not push nor pass any meaningful gun regulation. They only want to keep mentioning it so as to drown out a much needed Black agenda.

It's pretty incredible that in the same thread where you have people bytching and bytching that liberal cities have too much gun control, you claim that liberals don't want to do anything about gun control. Why is it that so many liberal cities and states keep passing gun control, to the point that the Supreme Court has been overthrowing liberal gun control laws left and right as being un-Constitutional, if you claim they don't want to do anything?

And a ton of Democrats have openly called it racist or anti-Black and drawn attention directly to the White Supremacy aspect of the shootings. They're making a huge deal about that part of it. Which kills your claim that they're trying to "pivot away" from that aspect of the killings.

 

[Tair]

No one is going to take that level of hair-splitting seriously when the other side is directly inspiring the anti-black terrorists.

Because HE included them. He explicitly bytched about immigration and said in his manifesto that he hated non-White people in general. He literally said that the Muslim-killer from Chirstchurch was his direct inspiration.

You do realize that this is at least the 4th "Great Replacement Theory" mass shooting, right? The first one killed 11 Jews. The second one killed 51 Muslims. The third one killed 23 Latinos. And this one killed 10 Black folk. The second, third, and fourth ones were EXPLICITLY unified to the point that they even copied passages from each other's manifestos. And you're bytching about the media making a connection between those events?

Yeah, there was this little thing called "Republican control of the House" and "conservative majority on the Supreme Court" that made that kind of hard. You know that, right?

It's pretty incredible that in the same thread where you have people bytching and bytching that liberal cities have too much gun control, you claim that liberals don't want to do anything about gun control. Why is it that so many liberal cities and states keep passing gun control, to the point that the Supreme Court has been overthrowing liberal gun control laws left and right as being un-Constitutional, if you claim they don't want to do anything?

And a ton of Democrats have openly called it racist or anti-Black and drawn attention directly to the White Supremacy aspect of the shootings. They're making a huge deal about that part of it. Which kills your claim that they're trying to "pivot away" from that aspect of the killings.

The strike-through are red-herrings which I won't even address further. They are nonsense. He dodged all of those Latinos, LGBTS, and other so-called POCs to specifically target Black people.

To your gun control points:

How will these laws pass now? Walk me through it. You have an even more right-wing supreme court, you have a right-wing party that has more white nationalist leanings than before as well. How will gun-control pass now given that?

If the dems couldn't pass any meaningful legislation in 2012-2016 because of the right-wing, what makes you think they can now?

And given that's the case, what is the point in even bring that up in regards to an anti-Black terrorist attack? The attack was a targeted attack on a poor Black community. A community that is poor due to centuries of oppression and mistreatment by the U.S. government. That is why reparations should be the main focus, not gun control in regards to the terrorist attack.

That is why I say they are trying to pivot away from making this a solely Black issue and throw all of these other issues in. It is to drown out a necessary agenda/policy for Black people.

 

[Burned Verses]

Retarded CO mocking the victims

Corrections Officer Suspended, to be Fired After Posting Meme Mocking Buffalo Mass Shooting Victims on Facebook

A New York Corrections officer has been suspended and will soon be fired after posting a meme mocking the victims of the recent mass shooting in Buffalo, The New York Corrections Department announced on Tuesday.

An 18-year-old white supremacist, identified as 18-year-old Payton Gendron, dressed in tactical gear killed 10 people and injured three others in a racially-motivated attack on Saturday afternoon at a Buffalo, New York, supermarket in the heart of the city's Black community. 11 of the 13 victims were African-American.


The offensive meme shared by corrections officer Greg Foster II showed a photo of a Tops Markets along with the caption, "Clean up on aisle 3, no wait 4, also on 7, 9, 12 and 13." Foster punctuated the meme with the comment, "Too soon? This should weed out some FB friends," followed by a laughing emoji.

According to state records, Gregory C. Foster II was employed as a corrections officer at the Attica Correctional Facility and was hired in 1997.

 

[I Really Mean It]

Retarded CO mocking the victims

Corrections Officer Suspended, to be Fired After Posting Meme Mocking Buffalo Mass Shooting Victims on Facebook

Evil.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

The strike-through are red-herrings which I won't even address further. They are nonsense.

Covering the EXACT shyt he said in his manifesto is "nonsense"? Don't make a fool of yourself.

To your gun control points:

How will these laws pass now? Walk me through it. You have an even more right-wing supreme court, you have a right-wing party that has more white nationalist leanings than before as well. How will gun-control pass now given that?

So no one can mention gun control because the Republicans won't let it pass....but you think explicitly pro-Black legislation can pass even though that is blocked by the exact same people who block gun control?

Like I said, you're making zero sense. You're just finding something to bytch about so you can push the "both sides" nonsense.



Republicans: Literally put a rocket in the back of people who target black folk for massacre

Democrats: Call for republicans to stop demonizing Black people, but also dare to say "people of color" and mention gun control while they're condemning anti-black racism



Great moral equivalency there.

 

[Adeptus Astartes]

The intention for both is to bar lawsuits against firearms sellers and manufacturers for crimes committed with their products.

As it should be. Why should a manufacturer of a legal product be liable for its criminal use?

 

[Professor Emeritus]

As it should be. Why should a manufacturer of a legal product be liable for its criminal use?

Because they are among the main ones flooding the streets with guns and blocking laws that would keep those guns out of the hands of criminals. The only reason gun distribution to criminals is so easy is because gun manufacturers have blocked all efforts to make gun control possible.

Getting people addicted to tobacco was "legal", but it still killed hundreds of thousands of people. Getting people addicted to opiates was "legal", but it still killed hundreds of thousands of people. Distributing cancerous chemicals was "legal" but it still fukked up hundreds of thousands of lives. All three industries have been getting sued like crazy because they knew their policies were leading to thousands of deaths even though they were completely legal because they had bought politicians who protected their interests.



I remember when you said gun control laws were bullshyt. So you don't think any laws should be passed to stop this from happening, but you also don't think corporations should bear any responsibility for shyt that happens with their product because laws haven't been passed to stop it from happening. You're excusing them for the mass gun distribution being legal AND insisting that it stay legal.

 

[Adeptus Astartes]

Because they are among the main ones flooding the streets with guns and blocking laws that would keep those guns out of the hands of criminals. The only reason gun distribution to criminals is so easy is because gun manufacturers have blocked all efforts to

Insane. No manufacturer of a legal product should be held liable for illegal actions committed by end users of the product.

Getting people addicted to tobacco was "legal", but it still killed hundreds of thousands of people.

Poor comparison. Cigarettes, even when used legally and properly, are deadly to the user. Tobacco companies also lied about the effects.

The product itself does not lead to deaths. Unsafe, improper, and Illegal usage leads to deaths. When guns are actually unsafe, i.e. the Remington 700 trigger issue, the company is sued out of business, and rightly so.

You and I will likely never see eye to eye on this issue.

 

[BiggWebb79]

 

[ORDER_66]

They mean WHITE domestic terrorism right???

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Tobacco companies also lied about the effects.

The product itself does not lead to deaths.

Gun manufacturers have lied about the impact of mass gun distribution too. And have purposely blocked federal study into the public health impact of guns.

How the NRA worked to stifle gun violence research

Gun violence research funding blocked

Gun violence research: History of the federal funding freeze




The distribution of the product inevitably leads to death. You can't hide behind "well if you only used it legally nothing will happen".

If people only used opioids responsibly then nothing bad would happen, they wouldn't OD or die....but the distribution of opioids inevitably led to hundreds of thousands of overdoses because opioid manufacturers lied about how addictive they were. Similarly, gun manufactures have lied about how likely their guns are to be used to cause crime and death and have gone out of their way to block research into the true impacts.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

They mean WHITE domestic terrorism right???

Tired of these dumbass hot takes where you don't even bother to read the article.


"The bill creates a requirement for biannual reporting on domestic terrorism threats. It also calls for assessments of the threat posed specifically by White supremacists and neo-Nazis."


"The vote comes in the wake of a horrific mass shooting over the weekend at a supermarket in a predominately Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, that killed 10 people and wounded three others. The Justice Department is investigating the shooting as a hate crime and "an act of racially-motivated violent extremism.""

"The 18-year-old suspected of opening fire at a Buffalo supermarket on Saturday told authorities he was targeting the Black community, according to an official familiar with the investigation."

"The alleged gunman made disturbing statements describing his motive and state of mind following his arrest, the official said. The statements were clear and filled with hate toward the Black community. Investigators also uncovered other information from search warrants and other methods indicating the alleged shooter was "studying" previous hate attacks and shootings, the official said."

"Eleven of the people who were shot were Black, officials said."



The article specifically mentions he was attacking the Black community FIVE times and the bill specifically targets White Supremacists, but y'all still trying to fukk around just for an agenda.

 

[ORDER_66]

Tired of these dumbass hot takes where you don't even bother to read the article.


"The bill creates a requirement for biannual reporting on domestic terrorism threats. It also calls for assessments of the threat posed specifically by White supremacists and neo-Nazis."


"The vote comes in the wake of a horrific mass shooting over the weekend at a supermarket in a predominately Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, that killed 10 people and wounded three others. The Justice Department is investigating the shooting as a hate crime and "an act of racially-motivated violent extremism.""

"The 18-year-old suspected of opening fire at a Buffalo supermarket on Saturday told authorities he was targeting the Black community, according to an official familiar with the investigation."

"The alleged gunman made disturbing statements describing his motive and state of mind following his arrest, the official said. The statements were clear and filled with hate toward the Black community. Investigators also uncovered other information from search warrants and other methods indicating the alleged shooter was "studying" previous hate attacks and shootings, the official said."

"Eleven of the people who were shot were Black, officials said."



The article specifically mentions he was attacking the Black community FIVE times and the bill specifically targets White Supremacists, but y'all still trying to fukk around just for an agenda.

Did anyone ask your remedial ass when I was clearly being sarcastic you fukking b*stard!!!???