re: Shooting with multiple victims in Greenville, Texas

Wow, that’s some tinfoil shite there

Twitter banned me again.

Cant even put motherfrickers in check on the facts without Twitter coming down on you.

A&M Commerce is a big commuter school. I suspect that a majority of the students are driving to school.

quote:

---

Are black people usually the culprits in mass shootings?

---

It depends on the definition of mass shooting. If you define it as four or more victims in a given shooting, then the answer to your question is yes. If you exclude gang violence then the answer is no, I think. That said if you are trying to make an honest database of mass shootings I don’t see why you would ignore gang violence.

quote:

---

Seems like we get a mass shooting everytime the powers that be need a narrative shift. Trump was making a huge announcement tomorrow morning. Call me crazy but the tinfoiler in me says the FBI/CIA recruits and radicalizes these mass shooters, keeps them dormant and activates them when they need a narrative shift

---

I’m not a tinfoil type and try to avoid getting caught up in the social media melt when something happens.. And will really just pay attention to what the AP reports.. BUT for me personally, going as for back as GWBs 2nd term, it seems like the closer we get to a national election, the more things that are tied to political ideology starts to happen.

In that case, it was gay marriage. It’s was as if all of a sudden gay marriage became an issue and the president gave this national speech about stopping gay marriage from becoming legal.. because at that time there were a lot more people still against it.. and I just remember thinking “out of all the shite going on in the Middle East, all the other issues there are in this country people are all of a sudden worried about gay people getting married?”

I’m sure this type of stuff has been going on since the start of this country.. In some form, but from my point of view, it seems like after that year, ever since, things have been amped up. And it isn’t just one party doing it to the other. I think Hillary Clinton was out to sabotage Obama’s campaign in the 08 primaries and it followed him into the presidential election and while he was in office. She manipulated her way into being SOS and in some way, it all came back on her in 2016 and costed her the election.

I think that in 2016 the whole black lives movement was fueled by political interest. it created division, people were being bussed into places to fuel news stories, etc, etc and then BAM after the election of 2016 BLM just sort of went away.

Now I don’t think any government agency would stage some type of mass shooting, but I do think when these things happen at the right time they are steered in certain directions to fit certain agendas and there are times when you have two sides steering things in two different directions and whatever side people are on, they buy into that side’s spin.

The reason I say I don’t think a government agency would stage something like this is because it seems like it would take a group of people to do so. And the more people that has to be involved the less likely it is to happen because more people means there is a greater chance someone will say something either before or after, but then again you really never know. It could take one person in an agency to recruit someone who knows where to look online to find someone who can be manipulated into doing something in the name of some ideology they have, So I don’t think it’s all that extreme to think there could be some type of influence from someone inside the government. But until I know for sure I am not going to say “this is what really happened”,, I will just say “I can see how someone in a government agency or someone with a political agenda could have had an influence o this”.

quote:

---

In my world nobody would ever be legally allowed to have a fire arm on public property. Firearms only on privately owned property for personal protection. If you are on public property the police will have to protect you

---

The police are not here to protect you.
Contrary to what some people may believe, it is not the responsibility of the police to protect private citizens. According to the public duty doctrine ruling that "the duty to provide public services is owed to the public at large, and, absent a special relationship between the police and an individual, no specific legal duty exists".

Unless you are an elected official or of some political importance, you are on your own for personal protection.

quote:

---

That said if you are trying to make an honest database of mass shootings I don’t see why you would ignore gang violence.

---

Depends on what you're trying to measure.

If you're tracking the risk of being caught up in a random shooting you exclude gang and domestic as those depend on your associations.

If you're tracking overall mass violence you include everything.

Have they caught the shooter?

Or even know who it is?

There is chatter about the graphic video and that link has the 'not nearly as graphic' video.


Soooo, how would I go about finding the other one? It says it was a Snapchat video, it has to have been converted somewhere.