Congresswoman Gabby Giffords Shot in Head

[Laerod]

With no evidence, I might add. ;) Patience is a virtue.

I just think of it as absolutley naive to try blaming others for what someone did. idk if naive would be the choice wrd but I couldn't think of anything else. Maybe ignorant.

It really isn't. Blaming others instead of blaming a perpetrator is naive.

[Desperate Measures]

With no evidence, I might add. Patience is a virtue.

I just think of it as absolutley naive to try blaming others for what someone did. idk if naive would be the choice wrd but I couldn't think of anything else. Maybe ignorant.

So, wait. Are you saying that we shouldn't let this guy go and that we shouldn't arrest Sarah Palin, instead? That's crazy talk.

[Grave_n_idle]

They've been talking about at least one other person of interest, although I wasn't aware that they'd actually gone so far as to suggest conspiracy.

Yeah they're also ,as I'm sure other have heard, blaming the tea party, conservatives and Sarah palin. and also talk radio

'They'?

As i mentioned, Giffords, herself, warned of potential harm should the constant vitriol triumph. Maybe those who employed it do have some responsibility to accept for what they have said.

It might be interesting to see - if the assailant were to admit to being directly inspired by Palin (for example) if 'depraved heart' could be made to stick. Not sure what Arizona's actual position is on 'depraved heart'...

[Grave_n_idle]

So we can derive the conclusion that... Swiss people are less unbalanced than Americans?

That's actually probably true...

We could also come to the conclusion that Switzerland is a tiny fraction of the size of the US.

Which shouldn't really affect the 'rate', if it's measured on a per capita basis.

[The Archiepelago]

I just think of it as absolutley naive to try blaming others for what someone did. idk if naive would be the choice wrd but I couldn't think of anything else. Maybe ignorant.

So, wait. Are you saying that we shouldn't let this guy go and that we shouldn't arrest Sarah Palin, instead? That's crazy talk.

then I must be crazy. lol.

[The Archiepelago]

Yeah they're also ,as I'm sure other have heard, blaming the tea party, conservatives and Sarah palin. and also talk radio

'They'?

As i mentioned, Giffords, herself, warned of potential harm should the constant vitriol triumph. Maybe those who employed it do have some responsibility to accept for what they have said.

It might be interesting to see - if the assailant were to admit to being directly inspired by Palin (for example) if 'depraved heart' could be made to stick. Not sure what Arizona's actual position is on 'depraved heart'...

Well I wonder if he's thinking of mentioning her just to make this even bigger than it is.

[Wikkiwallana]

Zero history of violence? Wow, what fairy tale world do you live in?

Less than SEIU
Less than Black Panthers
Caused less damage than the leftist demonstrations at G7/8/20 meetings etc...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Not_as_bad_as
Other people doing it doesn't make it ok.

And don't try to claim that by saying this I support the groups you mentioned in their actions. I don't, that's the whole point.

[The Archiepelago]

I just think of it as absolutley naive to try blaming others for what someone did. idk if naive would be the choice wrd but I couldn't think of anything else. Maybe ignorant.

It really isn't. Blaming others instead of blaming a perpetrator is naive.

oh ok

[Wikkiwallana]

She was in favor of tougher border security, though.

Which was exactly what I was referring to. She was in favor increasing border enforcement and of securing the border, something a leftist which this individual very well may have been, would have an intrinsic knee-jerk reaction to. Such a stance could very well have been motivation for attacking her and those around her yesterday. Given the rise of leftist extremism all across the Western world, this would only add on to the growing trend.

This strikes me less as of a knee-jerk reaction and more of a premeditated assault. Also, it saddens me that you think so little of others based solely on their political leanings that you think their first response is automatic violence.

[Marsini]

Yeah they're also ,as I'm sure other have heard, blaming the tea party, conservatives and Sarah palin. and also talk radio

'They'?

As i mentioned, Giffords, herself, warned of potential harm should the constant vitriol triumph. Maybe those who employed it do have some responsibility to accept for what they have said.

It might be interesting to see - if the assailant were to admit to being directly inspired by Palin (for example) if 'depraved heart' could be made to stick. Not sure what Arizona's actual position is on 'depraved heart'...

However, until then you should have nothing to say other than the shit should stop. I agree the Tea Party should stop using military rhetoric, the extremist Liberals should stop threatening to kill presidents with whom they disagree, and we should all agree to stop being so self-righteous and call out the crazies in both groups. My point is that you cannot hold them morally responsible because they did not directly advocate it. You can say that they were careless, should change their rhetoric, and issue and apology, but that is something else.

[-Bederich-]

Wiki has her as dead already.

I checked on Wikipedia it was changed.

[Marsini]

Which was exactly what I was referring to. She was in favor increasing border enforcement and of securing the border, something a leftist which this individual very well may have been, would have an intrinsic knee-jerk reaction to. Such a stance could very well have been motivation for attacking her and those around her yesterday. Given the rise of leftist extremism all across the Western world, this would only add on to the growing trend.

This strikes me less as of a knee-jerk reaction and more of a premeditated assault. Also, it saddens me that you think so little of others based solely on their political leanings that you think their first response is automatic violence.

You are correct. I disapprove of any knee-jerk reaction.

[Wikkiwallana]

Put those goal posts back. You shot off your mouth and got caught. Be a man and admit it.

Admit to what, exactly? It even discusses her stances in favor of cracking down on illegal immigrants crossing the border in the OP's NPR article. You're just voluntarily choosing to ignore the distinct possibility that this Congresswoman and members of her entourage, including a innocent nine year old girl were slaughtered by a leftist.

No, you're just refusing to admit that your worldview is so skewed and prejudiced that all problems must be caused by the "left". All the available evidence at this point indicates that this man subscribed to no known political party, and his political position seems to be unmappable on the left/right scale without breaking out complex numbers.

[Grave_n_idle]

However, until then you should have nothing to say other than the shit should stop.

That's certainly your opinion. I have been saying the shit should stop. I've also said that - until something suggests otherwise - each eprson is responsible for their own actions, if you care to read the thread.

That doesn't mean I can't also say that this kind of violence might well have some root in the militant rhetoric we've been hearing.

I agree the Tea Party should stop using military rhetoric, the extremist Liberals should stop threatening to kill presidents with whom they disagree,

I'm not talking about extremists and the Tea Party, really - I'm talking about 'mainstream' politicians like Bachmann and Palin who have made threats of violence an apparently acceptable part of their platform.

My point is that you cannot hold them morally responsible because they did not directly advocate it.

Horseshit. If I tell you to kill yourself, and you do - I have some 'moral responsibility' even if I can't be shown to have a legal one.

[Marsini]

However, until then you should have nothing to say other than the shit should stop.

That's certainly your opinion. I have been saying the shit should stop. I've also said that - until something suggests otherwise - each eprson is responsible for their own actions, if you care to read the thread.

That doesn't mean I can't also say that this kind of violence might well have some root in the militant rhetoric we've been hearing.

I agree the Tea Party should stop using military rhetoric, the extremist Liberals should stop threatening to kill presidents with whom they disagree,

I'm not talking about extremists and the Tea Party, really - I'm talking about 'mainstream' politicians like Bachmann and Palin who have made threats of violence an apparently acceptable part of their platform.

My point is that you cannot hold them morally responsible because they did not directly advocate it.

Horseshit. If I tell you to kill yourself, and you do - I have some 'moral responsibility' even if I can't be shown to have a legal one.

1. It is reckless to designate blame without evidence. Everybody was pissed when I said that it was an agent from Djbouti with the same amount of concrete evidence as they had. I expect reasonable standards other than the Tea Party motivated it because they said stuff.

2. Palin isn't a governor anymore, she is a celebrity. I prefer her to the morons in hollywood who support Hugo Chavez. Bachmann isn't a mainstream Republican to my knowledge. She also took back the statements questioning Obama's patriotism- which is the worst thing I found in an immediate search. Why not attempt Michael Steele or Boehner?

3. Actually, it is relatively different. You would be explicitly advocating for me to murder myself. The Tea Party is using indirect rhetoric. Moral responsibility means that they did something directly and undeniably morally reprehensible. Telling somebody to die falls under such a definition. Warning that a revolution would occur if the people's rights were violated is not morally reprehensible- although I disagree with even saying it this early if at all- it simply isn't. The fact is to be morally reprehensible you would have had to have a hand in the crime or directly incited the crime. The legal standards are relatively effective when it comes to this.

[Wikkiwallana]

Why should the average person give a shit? 99 percent of people didn't know she existed before she got shot. It's not as if the patrisan hate speech will go down, or that a Federal gun control law will go into effect. So why even care? Nothing will change. So a few people died? Big fucking deal people die every second.

Because even if we didn't know the victims we can be sad that their lives were taken so quickly and callously? Because if not for the anger and violence of one man, a 9 year old girl who had done no harm to anyone would still be alive right now? We can't regret that this is the kind of world we live in and wish for a better one?

[Farnhamia]

So we can derive the conclusion that... Swiss people are less unbalanced than Americans?

Have you studied the psychology of ever Swiss citizen? This argument is weak.

Are you saying that everyone in Switzerland walks around with a government-issued firearm over their shoulder? That is what I read "must keep their issued weapon with them" to mean. Oh, and what if they're in the Artillery?

[Wikkiwallana]

Your theory is that the number of murders is a constant, it's just the weapons that vary?

No murders will still happen either way just with another weapon.

It's not as easy to kill one person with a knife as with a gun, let alone a several at once, and it involves greater personal risk on the part of the assailant. So, yes, there will still be murdes and violent crimes, but the number of deaths of innocents will hopefully go down.

[Muravyets]

As do I.

Is there any proof that this was motivated by the Tea Party? Until then, they can state that your claims are idle speculation. Likewise, the Republican Party hasn't been issuing a "call to arms" or refering to weapons at all- the Tea Party makes indirect, dumbass statements. It isn't a game, which is why I am curious that people are attempting to score political points on this tragedy. The first remarks were mostly it was the Tea Party, gun control, and radical Communists. I have a problem with the majority of this thread. I want evidence. I want justice. However, we must wait. Tossing around useless, unvalidated claims does nothing.

Thank you for proving your critics right, yet again.

They're hiding behind the Explicit Proof Defense just like anti-choicers do. As long as they don't blatantly call for murder or assassination in their campaigns, they feel perfectly fine sleeping over the harm they encourage and incite through their rhetoric.

The debate is not about "did Political Party A cause Terrible Crime B?"

The debate is about "does a general atmosphere of hostility and violence in political discourse increase the risk of violent outbursts in general, and if so do those who hold public platforms have a responsibility to self-moderate?"

Try, please, to wrap your brain around that.

[Coccygia]

It was most likely not a conspiracy, the suspected shooter is said to be mentally unstable.

It should be pointed out that there is as yet no evidence whatsoever that the person who was reported by witnesses as having been seen near Loughner several times was actually connected to him in any way at all. He may be merely another witness, just as easily (maybe more easily) as involved in the crime.

Sadly it appears that OswaldLoughner acted alone, the other guy was just a cabbie (so was Travis Bickle though). Oh well he could still be a Teabagger. And I still think Obama's illegitimate son was involved somehow.

[Wikkiwallana]

So we can derive the conclusion that... Swiss people are less unbalanced than Americans?

Have you studied the psychology of ever Swiss citizen? This argument is weak.

As is using a single data point as proof of concept. Overall, countries with fewer guns have fewer deaths per capita from violent crime.

[Farnhamia]

It should be pointed out that there is as yet no evidence whatsoever that the person who was reported by witnesses as having been seen near Loughner several times was actually connected to him in any way at all. He may be merely another witness, just as easily (maybe more easily) as involved in the crime.

Sadly it appears that OswaldLoughner acted alone, the other guy was just a cabbie (so was Travis Bickle though). Oh well he could still be a Teabagger. And I still think Obama's illegitimate son was involved somehow.

No, it was John McCain's illegitimate child. You know, the one we heard about in the 2000 Republican primaries.

[Coccygia]

Sadly it appears that OswaldLoughner acted alone, the other guy was just a cabbie (so was Travis Bickle though). Oh well he could still be a Teabagger. And I still think Obama's illegitimate son was involved somehow.

No, it was John McCain's illegitimate child. You know, the one we heard about in the 2000 Republican primaries.

OK, now we're getting somewhere!

[Gauthier]

Sadly it appears that OswaldLoughner acted alone, the other guy was just a cabbie (so was Travis Bickle though). Oh well he could still be a Teabagger. And I still think Obama's illegitimate son was involved somehow.

No, it was John McCain's illegitimate child. You know, the one we heard about in the 2000 Republican primaries.

Are you sure? A Brownie at a Safeway would stand out to the blind.

[Grave_n_idle]

1. It is reckless to designate blame without evidence. Everybody was pissed when I said that it was an agent from Djbouti with the same amount of concrete evidence as they had. I expect reasonable standards other than the Tea Party motivated it because they said stuff.

I'm not designating blame without evidence. What I'm talking about is already a matter of public record (the rhetoric), and I'm not saying it forced an assailant to do anything.

2. Palin isn't a governor anymore, she is a celebrity. I prefer her to the morons in hollywood who support Hugo Chavez. Bachmann isn't a mainstream Republican to my knowledge. She also took back the statements questioning Obama's patriotism- which is the worst thing I found in an immediate search. Why not attempt Michael Steele or Boehner?

3. Actually, it is relatively different. You would be explicitly advocating for me to murder myself. The Tea Party is using indirect rhetoric. Moral responsibility means that they did something directly and undeniably morally reprehensible. Telling somebody to die falls under such a definition. Warning that a revolution would occur if the people's rights were violated is not morally reprehensible- although I disagree with even saying it this early if at all- it simply isn't. The fact is to be morally reprehensible you would have had to have a hand in the crime or directly incited the crime. The legal standards are relatively effective when it comes to this.

Bachmann has called for "insurrection" against the GOP, said she wanted people "armed and dangerous" and said they needed to "fight back" when she disapproved of a tax plan... Sarah Palin told Americans "Dont' retreat, instead - RELOAD". This rhetoric is out there, and you can choose to pretend it's not, but you don't just get to deny it and have it go away.