Another fucking spree shooting. Great.

it's undeniable that people have a grim hope that the perpetrators of mass violence aren't shown to be "one of theirs."

the proposed solutions for tackling the revealed misogyny and racism of violent men isn't state violence against them. (unless you consider all imprisonment to be state violence, which, ok, that's a consistent position of a kind). usually there aren't any proposed solutions at all! it's just, "we need to talk about this" or "men are in such a bad state right now, ugh"

a lot of the proposed solutions for the religious fanaticism of violent muslims is to crank up violence against muslims generally -- more exclusions, more selective borders, more bigotry, more surveillance, more wars

i thought i remembered that the tsarnaevs had recently visited chechnya and there was some speculation they had become radicalized there? am i misremembering?

i think the disability center was chosen bc of convenience. also while high profile targets are valuable to ISIS there is a benefit for terrorism that seems like it could strike anywhere - even places that you wouldn't think would be a target. after all the whole purpose is to terrorize you into thinking there's nowhere safe.

― Mordy, Thursday, December 3, 2015 4:48 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

But it doesn't seem particularly effective in this case -- attacking one's own workplace DOESN'T give the same impression that it could "strike anywhere" as killing hundreds enjoying Paris nightlife.

I guess the question is what we mean by "radicalized"? The Paris attackers (or at least the planner) actually had trained with and had ties to ISIS, iirc, like they could actually be said to be striking on behalf of the organization.

yeah it seems to me that something set him off and he advanced this plan forward for some bizarre reason.

why is it beneficial to know the motivations of any shooting?

indeed, a good question

also goole otm in making some points i had wanted to make but could not articulate

"I guess the question is what we mean by "radicalized"? "

http://www.theiacp.org/portals/0/pdfs/radicalizationtoviolentextremismawarenessbrief.pdf

the san bernardino shootings are so crazy i'd be hesitant to say anything about them. religion is a possible motive, sure.

but "the disability center was chosen bc of convenience" or "he was radicalized in saudi arabia" or (god help me i've seen this already today) "his jihadi wife brainwashed him". fuckin hell we don't know any of this.

there have been a fair number of documented cases of online 'grooming' to a POV lately the weirdest being this one: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/world/americas/isis-online-recruiting-american.html

xp any conjecture along those lines i've made in this thread are just gut feelings. not only do i agree that we don't really know any of those things but it seems likely we'll never have answers for some of them. it's not like a cleric in KSA is gonna call up the FBI to tell them about their late night rap sessions

well sure, who knows what evil lurks etc

in the next several days i'm sure we'll learn more about their internet habits, maybe more about travel, and for sure a lot more about the people they killed.

odds are, before they learn anything substantial about motives we'll all be talking about the next mass shooting instead

BC none that information Helsinki anyone other than armchair true detectives

No idea why autocorrect changed help to Helsinki

Karl Malone otm, like the PP shooting from last week was getting to the point of figuring some things out, when "we interrupt this story to bring you breaking news, mass shooting in san bernardino"

i don't see how this couldn't be both about a workplace grievance /and/ political terrorism. in some ways i can imagine someone taking a personal grievance and 'ennobling' (in a sick sense obv) an act of personal vengeance by turning it into an act of political violence.

otm

Which is more or less what happened with Flanagan.

They exclude me from their clique AND they are decadent westerners who reject the true path etc.

Agreed. Would be very unusual though. Keep expecting to find out the argument that supposedly kicked it off was about politics/religion.

i think that's how a lot of political paranoia begins, or rather isn't that a defining feature of paranoia -- the idea that behind all these personal slights (real or simply perceived) is some larger conspiracy that extends up and out?

xposts

there was a detail i'd read early on that said there was an argument that led to dude storming out and coming back armed up, but everything new i'm reading--escape SUV rented 3 days in advance, 12 homemade pipe bombs left sitting in the house, all their hard drives & cell phones & motherboards methodically destroyed before cops showed up--is really confusing me. why go to such lengths to hide your motivations?

i always sort of assumed that the "radicalization" of the tsarnaevs and (potentially) this guy had less to do with a particular org or a particular plan and was instead almost like an "activation." like, dudes travel abroad, and get inspired to do a lil terrorism of their own --- their own design, their plan, etc.

ISIS doesn't need to export trained soldiers, or help cells acquire materiel --- they just need to convince a couple ppl to ~consider~ making a trip to walmart or wherever and load up on guns'n'ammo. maybe they'll go through with it, maybe they won't.

decades of homegrown terrorism and the best gun markets in the world provides an almost by the numbers approach

many xps

"in some ways i can imagine someone taking a personal grievance and 'ennobling' (in a sick sense obv) an act of personal vengeance by turning it into an act of political violence."

I can totally believe that being one person's motivation. But getting your wife to go along esp. when you have a six month old child?!?!? It starts to get harder to imagine that.

ISIS doesn't need to export trained soldiers, or help cells acquire materiel --- they just need to convince a couple ppl to ~consider~ making a trip to walmart or wherever and load up on guns'n'ammo. maybe they'll go through with it, maybe they won't.

decades of homegrown terrorism and the best gun markets in the world provides an almost by the numbers approach

Yes and no. It's still going to be far more effective to have coordinated attacks by trained individuals loyal to an organization than to rely on randos who may or may not do shit. Paris had a lot more impact on people and policy than something like this will.

it seems like maybe they thought they'd get away with it? i was surprised when it turned into a manhunt. i mean on some level they must've known that you can't do this kind of thing in the US and get away.

the detail that's stuck with me was them dropping off their six month old in the morning and saying something about a dentist appointment, and then he went to the party alone, then left.

i think that's the timeline there. if i'm remembering it right, that means they were going to do this and it wasn't spur of the moment or initiated by some argument at the party.

I mean 100-200 deaths caused by a resourced organization makes you think "What if they have sleeper cells in other world cities? Maybe they're planning an attack near me? How powerful are they?" It's scarier (to me at least) than an unhinged guy reading stuff on the internet and shooting up his office.

(On Tuesday, in fact, a measure that would have prevented people on the terrorism watch list from buying guns was defeated in the House of Representatives.)

this country is so sick why would you not want to prevent people on the terrorism watch list from buying guns???

because what if dear leader obama finally unveils his plan to capture the united states and become a dictator and he declares all good conservative americans to be "terrorists" and then they can't go buy...another gun to add to their collection. hm. yeah it doesn't add up, even on the crazy conspiracy side of things

also you'd think if you were the POTUS and were going to stage an anti-democratic coup you'd probably have more powerful levers at your disposal than changing gun access laws for terrorists

that's what he WANTS you to think

Fwiw mordy 100% of the posts about hoping this guy wasn't a Muslim or Arab in my Facebook feed were Muslims. Some of them could be characterized as leftists, but most couldn't. Tbh it bothers me too, but I can't pretend I don't feel a version of it myself. I'm not proud of it. All of that is, of course, purely anecdotal, but so is everything you're saying.

not for me --- it's far scarier to me that someone "radical" enough (be it via Islam, Christianity, or w/e else) could just pop over to gander mountain and get what they need to breeze into any public place anywhere and shoot the place up

the feds actually seem p good at keeping tabs on cells, simply because any given number of ppl needs to communicate and plan shit. loners who may or may not act out something terrible without the need for handling are a lot tougher to anticipate (as we have seen many many times)

couple xps there

fwiw (not much) here is Paul Ryan on why people on the terrorism watch list should still be able to purchase weapons: “government officials put people on such lists without any due legal process and so denying those listed the right to bear arms would violate their rights.”

there's actually some truth in that, but ryan and his cronies don't apply that truth to a million other things that don't have to do with guns. like, say, armed drones.

It bothers me, to be clear, because it feels gross to divert attention from the murder of the victims to handwringing about what might happen to you. Some of these FB people linked to specific stories about violence against Muslims post-Paris (a cabbie was killed, I gather?) but I didn't really investigate those alleged incidents. Some people linked to a tabloidy looking news headline about MUSLIM KILLERS (ny post, maybe?)

One of them (she wears hijab) just posted thanks to suburban white ladies for smiling really big at her as she went about her business today. I feel complex things about this phenomenon.

In a perverse way I actually see big problems with the idea of not allowing gun purchases
by people on a vague "watch list." I mean I support repealing the second amendment or severely curtailing it, but as long as our high court says it's a right I'm not psyched about denying rights based on semi-arbitrary, overbroad suspicion lists.

But ... guns being a right. Just think about how fucking absurd that seems. "I have the right to own an item who's express purpose is to kill other things".

the country was founded on killing other things daily

and a fifth of the populace is still living there

xxpost ok sure, but as long as the Supreme Court interprets the 2nd Amendment as it currently does there seems little legal rationale for denying that right to a minority report list of mostly-Muslims the FBI generated

also there do seem to be non-legal ways to get guns.

like if there is a plot brewing im not sure registering for firearm licenses is a consideration.

A panoply of voices, with a minimum of delusional claptrap: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/03/us/mass-shootings-fear-voices.html

TBH this guy probably has the right attitude:

Kieran, 33, from Quincy, Mass., said he was more worried about car accidents and hard living than he was about gun violence. He said it was “irrational” to worry too much about mass shootings and terrorist attacks.
He said he had never been the victim of any kind of assault in his life.
“I am aware of the possibility but recognize it as remote enough that any thoughts or preparation for such an attack would be irrational and distract me from real threats to my immediate existence, like traffic accidents (which I HAVE experienced) or my own risky behaviors like drinking too much (quit three years ago), smoking (quit eight years ago), or eating unhealthy (been vegetarian for four months now),” he wrote.
“I try to keep my fears and anxieties in check and make sure I focus on actively improving my life instead of worrying about unseen threats that I can’t control,” he continued. “I see this approach to life as me doing my part to defeat terror – which is an emotion, not an organization.”

YES A+ finally someone w brains

That's a nice illustration of how rational people can quickly turn into narcissistic navel-gazers. I wonder how often that dude worries about anybody besides himself.

ain't nobody done assaulted me before. I'm too likable. You know I can't help but pontificate how blessed I am, to have the gifts I have. I chalk it up to my healthy way of living - I'd be happy to share my gifts with you all, if you'll bend an ear.

My ethos is to only control things I can directly influence as an individual! Political action is a waste of precious energy!