Explaining the Narcissistic Rage of the Left

[Kulindahr]

Your gun lovers are about to begin a long downward spiral. The Las Vegas massacre convinces almost everyone we must limit automatic weapons.

In other words, Americans are willing to believe a lie. So far, there is no evidence that the shooter used any automatic weapons -- in fact from the sound recordings available, it's pretty plain he didn't.

What it ought to convince people of is to hold those decreeing a "gun free zone" responsible when violence with guns occurs there: according to news sources, both the hotel and the grounds below were "gun free". Since the firing was done from the hotel, it is 100% responsible for the deaths and injuries since it failed to enforce its policy.

 

[Kulindahr]

Respect "regardless of demeanor"? It is hard to respect someone who is charging you with intent to do great bodily harm. Police also deserve respect. Last year, 16 unarmed blacks were killed by police, but that includes cases of legitimate self defense by police as well as accidents. [Text: Removed][Link: Removed]

Allowing even one servant of the government to get away with shooting even one unarmed innocent person means that the government has abdicated responsibility to respect our rights, because it affirms that the government can take our lives at will.

 

[Mariatenebre]

You're invited to participate in the defence of the United States when Islamic extremists choose to respond to your insults.

I am certain that you would be prepared to die in defence of your beliefs, and for your country....after provoking so many Islamic imbeciles into using violence against your fellow citizens.

I prefer diplomacy knowing that provoking people does not resolve differences between them.

I shall not be sending you flowers.

I don't think you get it kallipolis if you deny yourself freedom to appease an ideology or foreign power then you are a conquered person. We have a right in the West to criticize or blaspheme any religion we wish and that includes Islam. If Muslims react by trying to kill those that blaspheme their religion then all they prove is how violent their religion is. Really what you are doing is the bigotry of low expectations of many Liberals. You think that Islam shouldn't be criminalized because Muslims are overly emotional violent children whom we must cater too lest they throw a temper tantrum. The only way theocratic Islam can be stopped is by blaspheming the religion. After all when Christianity controlled much of the West the Enlightenment thinkers fought for the rights of dissidents to blaspheme Christianity. Also I don't see why I should be kind to Islam or really any of the Abrahamic religions when they pretty much all blaspheme Pagan and non Abrahamic religions and other Deities etc. Before Islam Mecca was a religiously tolerant Pagan Holy City where Pagans, Jews, Christians etc all could go and practice their faith freely. After Islam if you so much as showed up with a cross, Star of David or image of a Pagan Deity you risk your life. Also non Muslims aren't even allowed in Mecca because according to the Quran kafirs are considered unclean. I will not stop blaspheming any of the Abrahamic religions as they have no problem insulting my Gods and holy figures and I will not like a conquered dhimmi stop criticizing any religion much less the Abrahamics. I guess I hold Muslims to a higher standard then the left does. I not only ask I demand that they acknowledge that their religion can and must be criticized and that people have the right to blaspheme, criticize and leave it or any religion for that matter without threats of violence. I know that Islam is a savage religion but I expect for them to act better.

 

[SeaCore]

I'm not entirely certain having other people with firearms would have made this situation safer. I can conceive of the possibility of it actually making the death-toll higher.

I'll admit upfront. I am not gun literate. Something I clearly need to change even if I don't participate in gun culture.

But that aside, I'm under the impression that there would be a clear danger of injuring the other people at the concert trying to take down this person with a gun. It's a crowded area that's in panic mode and no one is aware of the shooter's intention. There could be multiple shooters. And if people start brandishing their guns in response how are they supposed to discern who is safe and who is not? You could very well end up with an even bigger blood bath from people making hasty decisions that, while well intended, make everything worse.

 

[Mariatenebre]

Most of the soldiers fighting against Islamic States armies, are Muslim....they represent the majority of victims, along with many Muslim civilians.

Thank fully the winds of change are now blowing against Islamic States with the likelihood that they will soon be eliminated.

Do please distinguish between Islam, and those who masquerade as Muslims while murdering innocent people.

You don't get it do you. Islam doesn't consider kafirs to be innocent people. Further more on your comment that the majority of victims of Islam are Muslims this is because in Islam in the Quran and Hadith Muslims are demanded to wage jihad not just on disbelievers but hypocrites aka people who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Islam to the T. It doesn't take much to be considered an apostate in Islam and in the Hadith the punishment for apostasy is death.

Let's not forget that Mohammad slaughtered the Pagans who would not convert to Islam and destroyed their holy shrines and statues. They are doing no different then what ISIS is doing. In fact Mohammad was killed by a Jewish woman after he slaughtered her male relatives. She cooked him a meal and poisoned it. Of course when this was found out he had her killed but eventually he died of the poison this heroic Jewish woman fed him. I mean the fact that you say that Islam is peaceful shows you have no idea what you are talking about and most likely never studied the Quran, Hadith or Sunnah. Hell ask Asma Bint Marwan, Umm Qirfa or the Black Ethiopian Priestess of Al Uzzah who were slaughtered by the Muslims how "peaceful" Islam is.

Not really. Our internal problems are increasing as the influence of the Puritans and Protestants in general have decreased, Modern democracy was born of the independence and self reliance engendered by the Protestant Reformation. That is the major reason why democracy and innovation have flourished is Protestant countries and struggled--and continue to struggle--in Catholic countries where people are taught to accept authority.

Actually Democracy comes from a return in the Enlightenment to the Pagan and Humanist values of Greece and Rome. Greece even had a Holiday Demokratia celebrating Democracy's Divine Founders Zeus, Athena and Themis. These Puritans you defend were superstitious theocrats who burned people as witches.

Also Benvolio is dead wrong on Obama. Obama got just as much hate as Trump including racist hate. I remember close to a German restaurant I go to this gun shop depicted Obama as an African native, there was also the birthers nonsense. Hell some right wing kid terrorist threatened to shoot up my brother's school if Obama got elected all though they caught him.

That being said Obama's Islamophilia always bothered me. We have a right to blaspheme Mohammad or any sacred figure of any religion. Obama and Bush painting Islam as some kind of peaceful religion is really a betrayal to ex Muslims, women, LGBT people etc.

 

[Kulindahr]

I'm not entirely certain having other people with firearms would have made this situation safer. I can conceive of the possibility of it actually making the death-toll higher.

I'll admit upfront. I am not gun literate. Something I clearly need to change even if I don't participate in gun culture.

But that aside, I'm under the impression that there would be a clear danger of injuring the other people at the concert trying to take down this person with a gun. It's a crowded area that's in panic mode and no one is aware of the shooter's intention. There could be multiple shooters. And if people start brandishing their guns in response how are they supposed to discern who is safe and who is not? You could very well end up with an even bigger blood bath from people making hasty decisions that, while well intended, make everything worse.

Actually the Vegas situation was a good parallel to the Austin, Texas shooting back in 1966: shooter in a high place, victims down below. In such a situation, people below with rifles have a good chance to suppress the shooter -- but only with rifles; the distance was too great for sidearms to be effective (except in movie scripts). If three or four people below had had rifles, they could have reduced the toll tremendously, the only risk being hitting the wrong hotel window(s) (or, remotely, missing the hotel entirely), or someone being hit with hot brass kicked out of a rifle.

The tactics of this situation are a pretty hot topic right now on shooting sites, and the above is acknowledged just about universally. Less than three people below with rifles wouldn't have been able to suppress the shooter effectively for a number of reasons, so it's acknowledged that concealed carriers would have been useless for responding. The big question that rises to the top is how the shooter managed to get all those weapons and gear into a supposedly gun-free hotel, leading to the conclusion that liability here lies with hotel management for failing to put any teeth in the policy.

 

[Kulindahr]

You don't get it do you. Islam doesn't consider kafirs to be innocent people.

That depends on the branch of Islam, though since WW I it's essentially true for the majority.

Further more on your comment that the majority of victims of Islam are Muslims this is because in Islam in the Quran and Hadith Muslims are demanded to wage jihad not just on disbelievers but hypocrites aka people who claim to be Muslims but do not follow Islam to the T. It doesn't take much to be considered an apostate in Islam and in the Hadith the punishment for apostasy is death.

I've seen that referred to as "the suicide clause of Islam" because it essentially authorizes any Muslim to diss any other by declaring him or her not really a Muslim.

 

[Benvolio]

Allowing even one servant of the government to get away with shooting even one unarmed innocent person means that the government has abdicated responsibility to respect our rights, because it affirms that the government can take our lives at will.

Accidents happen. In crisis situation, it is not always possible to know who is unarmed and innocent. And yes, police officers are often prosecuted criminally when they shoot unarmed innocent people.

 

[ballcaphair]

Imagine you are black, unarmed, fear lethal force and a man in a uniform has a gun pointed at you. Just imagine your feelings.

 

[Mariatenebre]

That depends on the branch of Islam, though since WW I it's essentially true for the majority.



I've seen that referred to as "the suicide clause of Islam" because it essentially authorizes any Muslim to diss any other by declaring him or her not really a Muslim.

Yeah and considering that Mohammad himself threatened to burn people alive for not praying he had no issue in killing Muslims who didn't adhere to Islam. Hell there was even the apostate wars after Mohammad died where many people left Islam and the Muslim armies had to subdue them.

Also most sects of Islam do not consider kafirs to be innocent people. Mohammad himself certainly didn't. His Quran, Hadith and Sunnah certainly do not either. Now in a Islamic society Jews and Christians are allowed to keep their religion if they basically live as second class citizens or dhimmis. However even the word dhimmi derives from the Arabic word for being guilty and dhimmis were treated in similar conditions as Blacks in apartheid South Africa or in segregation in the American South. However Pagans, Atheists basically non Abrahamics do not have that option even. They have to convert to Islam or die.

 

[Kulindahr]

Accidents happen. In crisis situation, it is not always possible to know who is unarmed and innocent. And yes, police officers are often prosecuted criminally when they shoot unarmed innocent people.

"Often"?




Mostly they get paid vacations for shooting people, innocent or otherwise.

 

[ballcaphair]

"Often"?




Mostly they get paid vacations for shooting people, innocent or otherwise.

The innocent victims get bereaved survivors forever.

 

[Benvolio]

The only solution is to hire only perfect people as cops.

 

[Kulindahr]

The only solution is to hire only perfect people as cops.

Careful, or you'll start to sound like George Washington.

 

[mikey3000]

And the best part is, the left is sniveling how Russia tried to sway the election via Face Book ads. Well, who sold the ads to Russia? Wait till Zuckerberg runs in 2020. LOL! And didn't ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, Hollywood, Broadway, The View, Ellen, Robert De Nero, and every other person with some sort of 'platform' try to influence the election? Doesn't America influence foreign elections? But, man, you guys fall for the lies hook, line and sinker.

 

[johaninsc]

 

[mikey3000]

That's right. Ignore the facts and blame everyone else. Typical liberal. Just like how the left squaked when Trump said , "wait and see" if hell accept the results of the election. You guys have been shitting your pants for almost a year now, ever since your queen's defeat. So much for the smooth transition of power, eh? Yup.

 

[Stardreamer]

That's right. Ignore the facts and blame everyone else. Typical liberal. Just like how the left squaked when Trump said , "wait and see" if hell accept the results of the election. You guys have been shitting your pants for almost a year now, ever since your queen's defeat. So much for the smooth transition of power, eh? Yup.

Gee I wonder where they could have learned that from? The word birthers comes to mind.

 

[SeaCore]

I'm still not sure what this thread ends up being about. I'd imagine there's some goal you'd like to see achieved from posting this thread, maybe to have some push back on your perception of the left, maybe some acknowledgement from the left that it failed itself by living too much in the realm of pure ideals, or possibly signal to like minded people that they're aren't alone in their view of the left.

What ever the goal is, I'm not sure this thread would be on track to meet it.
The quote you pulled from that article makes it seem a lot more mean spirited than it actually is. And I don't think it's entirely wrong. In my experience, the 'left' hasn't been acknowledging as much of their fault in why people began moving away from them. And I would tend to agree that there is a bit of a narcissism where they've put themselves on pedestal that looks down upon others.

I also feel it's a bit dishonest to put all the hate that Trump gets on the left. Plenty of people from the right hate and rail against Trump too. Trump was not everyone's first candidate. This election was one of the most polarizing and several people voted strictly on a lesser-of-two-evils basis rather than on active support for one candidate.
Approval ratings don't come just from the left. And Trump's approval is not stellar.

 

[ballcaphair]

I'm still not sure what this thread ends up being about. I'd imagine there's some goal you'd like to see achieved from posting this thread, maybe to have some push back on your perception of the left, maybe some acknowledgement from the left that it failed itself by living too much in the realm of pure ideals, or possibly signal to like minded people that they're aren't alone in their view of the left.

What ever the goal is, I'm not sure this thread would be on track to meet it.
The quote you pulled from that article makes it seem a lot more mean spirited than it actually is. And I don't think it's entirely wrong. In my experience, the 'left' hasn't been acknowledging as much of their fault in why people began moving away from them. And I would tend to agree that there is a bit of a narcissism where they've put themselves on pedestal that looks down upon others.

I also feel it's a bit dishonest to put all the hate that Trump gets on the left. Plenty of people from the right hate and rail against Trump too. Trump was not everyone's first candidate. This election was one of the most polarizing and several people voted strictly on a lesser-of-two-evils basis rather than on active support for one candidate.
Approval ratings don't come just from the left. And Trump's approval is not stellar.

Reposted for validation of this thread. (Let the name calling and blaming continue. That's a solution that seems to be working.) You have my respect and support SeaCore