Charleston Church Shooting

Suspect has been reportaly been identified

http://gawker.com/the-charleston-shooting-suspect-has-reportedly-been-ide-1712212058?rev=1434636729562&utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

Suspected South Carolina church shooter received a gun as a birthday present in April

Right, happy 21st borthday

LL_ said:
Suspect has been reportaly been identified

http://gawker.com/the-charleston-shooting-suspect-has-reportedly-been-ide-1712212058?rev=1434636729562&utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


Suspected South Carolina church shooter received a gun as a birthday present in April


Right, happy 21st borthday

Wait, hold up. So he has a record and still he got a gun? Or did he 'earn' the arrest record after getting the gun? And I gather that in SC you can just "gift" a gun hence getting around a background check? Or perhaps it is one of those states that believes that background checks are not necessary to own a gun...

And the response from FOX news... but what did you really expect??

http://www.salon.com/2015/06/18/fox_friends_just_cant_stop_the_spin_in_the_wake_of_charleston_we_must_arm_our_pastors_and_priests/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=socialflow

"The segment began with Bishop E.W. Jackson, the senior pastor at Hope Christian Church, opining that he was concerned that this wasn’t a racially motivated crime, but a religiously motivated one. “There does seem to be a rising hostility against Christians in this country because of our biblical views,” he said.

“I would urge pastors in these churches to prepare to defend themselves,” Bishop Jackson added. “It’s sad, but I think that we have to arm ourselves.”"

Jackson_Fusion said:
I should have pointed this out a long time ago....I always thought it was funny watching Zoinks rile the creadulous up, but.... Zoinks is a parody troll account. Read his stuff with that in mind and after 3 or 4 posts you'll see it's true.
The person running the account in no way shares a conservative viewpoint. They post as the boogie man dullard that leftists assume right wingers are. Some fall for it, some don't.
There is a poster here who takes the opposite tack- posts radically left wing things and then sits back and watches the flames, tossing in a cup of gasoline here and there as they burn lower. They have had the decency to keep out of threads like these, however.
Don't let him wind you up. Sometimes the subject is appropriate for a bit of piss taking. This isn't one of them.
The thoughts of all people of good will I am sure find great accord this morning, regardless of political beliefs.

Who's the "troll leftist?" Tulip and her other names? Not.

I, Tulip and her other names, have warned about guns for a very long time, and have been arguing for gun control for a very long time. I am not a troll, but a real person with pragmatic, well-thought out views. I have stayed out of recent debates because I don't like to be personally attacked for my opinions and positions. I did predict and bemoan this chaos we now have with guns and their use in our destructive era, for which I was derided and mocked. End of story.

LL_ said:
Suspect has been reportaly been identified

http://gawker.com/the-charleston-shooting-suspect-has-reportedly-been-ide-1712212058?rev=1434636729562&utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow


Suspected South Carolina church shooter received a gun as a birthday present in April


Right, happy 21st borthday

In that first photograph they released, the patches on the right side of his jacket (his right) appear to be the old Apartheid-era flag of the Republic of South Africa and the post UDI flag of Rhodesia. The Rhodesian flag in particular has become a Stormfront and White Supremacist symbol, used mostly because so few would recognize it.

Condolences to Charleston, and yes, @Hoops, this feels like the sixties, what with voter suppression and rising interracial tensions, mixed with the strength of the NRA and passions around fear and loathing toward our President and those who respect him.

Saying it is "like the 60's" is the same as people taking isolated incidents and saying it is "like Nazi Germany"

The sixties, if you were there, ramzzoinksus, you woke up every day to horrible violent gun crimes and other assaults on people of color. Four little girls in Birmingham were killed in a church when supporters of the KKK burned their church.

springgreen2 said:
The sixties, if you were there, ramzzoinksus, you woke up every day to horrible violent gun crimes and other assaults on people of color. Four little girls in Birmingham were killed in a church when supporters of the KKK burned their church.

So then today is nothing like the 60's

Watching CNN. Looks like they caught him.

"The white man who killed nine people at a historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, told his victims he was there "to shoot black people," a law enforcement official said Thursday, citing witnesses to the shooting."

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

TarheelsInNj said:
"The white man who killed nine people at a historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, told his victims he was there "to shoot black people," a law enforcement official said Thursday, citing witnesses to the shooting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

This initial statement from South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is even more disturbing with that information:

"While we do not yet know all of the details, we do know that we'll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another."

Well, he's been caught, and maybe we will find out motivation.

Crazy people are crazy. If they do not do something for one supposed reason they will do it for another.

springgreen2 said:
Well, he's been caught, and maybe we will find out motivation.

His reported statement above and the Facebook picture of him wearing a jacket featuring flag patches from Rhodesia and apartheid South Africa give me a pretty good idea.

ramzzoinksus said:
Crazy people are crazy. If they do not do something for one supposed reason they will do it for another.

Perhaps, but that doesn't change the fact that he had a reason. He's a self-professed racist, judging from his choice of insignias.

Imagine if someone were to go into a libertarian meeting, shout out "you libertarians are destroying the country," and proceed to kill a bunch of people. Try to tell me that you wouldn't feel personally threatened on a level that I wouldn't.

@ramzzoinskus: It's important to know if it's a hate crime because he may be part of a larger hate-motivated group who could be planning terrorist and racist crimes.

Stoughton said:

TarheelsInNj said:
"The white man who killed nine people at a historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, told his victims he was there "to shoot black people," a law enforcement official said Thursday, citing witnesses to the shooting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

This initial statement from South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is even more disturbing with that information:

"While we do not yet know all of the details, we do know that we'll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another."

How so? She didn't say we'd never know the reason- she said we'd never understand it. Should she have said, "oh whatever the reason, it'll be understandable?"

Divide, divide, divide, off we go back to the stupid left right paradigm that for some all events and words must be sorted.

I don't understand it.

springgreen2 said:
@ramzzoinskus: It's important to know if it's a hate crime because he may be part of a larger hate-motivated group who could be planning terrorist and racist crimes.

Yes, if he is part of a large group. But he and few loser friends in a basement does not a large group make and that is far more likely if there is a "group"

I'm at home today so I can check a few sites I wouldn't normally be able to check. There are plenty of posters on Free Republic who are even calling this a hate crime, though there are a few who follow ramzzoinksus' opinion that every single person who was ever murdered was killed by someone who hated them and thus all murder is the same.

The posters on the boards at Stormfront are a little more focused on how this looks for White Supremacists. They haven't yet come out cheered the murders, but they have blamed Hollywood movies such as Guess Who's Coming To Dinner, compared it to the amount of whites murdered by blacks as justification, and at least one who claimed having "members of the animal kingdom in our midst, one can hardly blame one or two of our brothers for flipping out" asking us not to blame the victim but the cause, which he identifies as "marxist liberalism". Other than that, in general, most of the Stormfront posters appear to be on ramzzoinksus' side, except in many cases you would need to substitute "leftist-statist" for "Jew-run".

That's enough now for me. I'm off to watch 6 hours of cat videos to scrub my brain of that filthy feculence.

ramzzoinksus said:

springgreen2 said:
@ramzzoinskus: It's important to know if it's a hate crime because he may be part of a larger hate-motivated group who could be planning terrorist and racist crimes.

Yes, if he is part of a large group. But he and few loser friends in a basement does not a large group make and that is far more likely if there is a "group"

Someone might want to know something about the other "losers" in that group. At least it might be wise to question them.

If there are associates I am sure they will get the strongest scrutiny. And the should. Another big difference from the absurd 60's attempted comparison.

Jackson_Fusion said:

Stoughton said:

TarheelsInNj said:
"The white man who killed nine people at a historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, told his victims he was there "to shoot black people," a law enforcement official said Thursday, citing witnesses to the shooting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

This initial statement from South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is even more disturbing with that information:

"While we do not yet know all of the details, we do know that we'll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another."

How so? She didn't say we'd never know the reason- she said we'd never understand it. Should she have said, "oh whatever the reason, it'll be understandable?"
Divide, divide, divide, off we go back to the stupid left right paradigm that for some all events and words must be sorted.


I don't understand it.

The suspect wasn't dead, and even if he were, nearly every criminal leaves some sort of trail as to what motivated him/her. In a three-sentence statement, what's the purpose of using one sentence to forestall any explanation of what motivated this person? Is it normal to announce, "A murder took place in Smallville today and we'll never understand what motivated it. The two suspects remain on the loose."

It's not a left-right question, but one of competence and the governor's odd inclusion of the motivation language. Besides, it's not even 24 hours and I think it's fairly clear that violent racial hatred motivated this crime.

I for one am glad the coward didn't shoot himself. Let him stand trial for this.

Stoughton said:

Jackson_Fusion said:

Stoughton said:

TarheelsInNj said:
"The white man who killed nine people at a historic African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, told his victims he was there "to shoot black people," a law enforcement official said Thursday, citing witnesses to the shooting."
http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/18/us/charleston-south-carolina-shooting/index.html

This initial statement from South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley is even more disturbing with that information:

"While we do not yet know all of the details, we do know that we'll never understand what motivates anyone to enter one of our places of worship and take the life of another."

How so? She didn't say we'd never know the reason- she said we'd never understand it. Should she have said, "oh whatever the reason, it'll be understandable?"
Divide, divide, divide, off we go back to the stupid left right paradigm that for some all events and words must be sorted.


I don't understand it.

The suspect wasn't dead, and even if he were, nearly every criminal leaves some sort of trail as to what motivated him/her. In a three-sentence statement, what's the purpose of using one sentence to forestall any explanation of what motivated this person? Is it normal to announce, "A murder took place in Smallville today and we'll never understand what motivated it. The two suspects remain on the loose."
It's not a left-right question, but one of competence and the governor's odd inclusion of the motivation language. Besides, it's not even 24 hours and I think it's fairly clear that violent racial hatred motivated this crime.

3 thoughts and then moving on: rather than focusing on a made up quote I think it makes more sense to focus on what was actually said, wouldn't you agree?

Second, there is a difference in "knowing" and "understanding". I know you know this, but do you understand?

Third, can we not default immediately, in a tragedy, to word parsing and political point scoring? Are we grading her statement? Are we as a nation so trite?

Can you share why you think she would want to deny, with zero knowledge and at great risk for being proven utterly wrong hours into an investigation, a racial motive for a mass murder? Help me understand.

Finally, President Obama is discussing the scourge of guns, and decrying the politics of "this town" around guns. This is the problem. And he points out that this does not happen in other countries to the same extent. He is discussing Dr. King and racism, and "another dark chapter in our history." I would add not just the sixties, but 1642 to 1868.

Heartsick about these killings.

A horrible, horrible crime. Here's a powerful article from Esquire with a somewhat different take and does bring in the church's amazing history:

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a35793/charleston-shooting-discussion/

I don't understand how anyone can equate murder with a hate crime such as this... a murder, usually, is one person killing another for a specific reason. However, a hate crime where one person murders a number of others because of their race, gender, orientation, or religion always has the potential to expand... if he had not been caught after killing nine black parishioners at this particular church, who is to say he would not have gone right on killing other black people in other places? He said he was there to "kill black people." There are a lot of black people in the world.

Yes, he's crazy. But he's crazy in a way that sets him apart from others. And it's not the same as one person killing another because they want their wallet or jewelry or because they slept with the other person's spouse... those reasons are personal and individual.

How can anyone not see the difference???