How are we to show, conclusively, that Palin's words are what caused this? For the guy that pulls the trigger, it is obvious what caused the bullet to plow through the woman's skull. Look, if this guy turns out not to be batshit insane, and he comes out and says "I did it cause Sarah Palin told me to," then I'll say Palin bears responsibility Up until that point, it's far from provable who or what influenced this douchebag to do what he did.

Quote :

"Unless you think "cause" means something other than "increases the probability of an event occurring""

Given that that isn't the actual definition of "cause," I'd say that people are right to question if the rhetoric played a part. Leave it to a liberal to completely redefine a word in order to advance an argument

[Edited on January 9, 2011 at 6:14 PM. Reason : ]

1/9/2011 6:14:40 PM

Quote :

"How are we to show, conclusively, that Palin's words are what caused this? For the guy that pulls the trigger, it is obvious what caused the bullet to plow through the woman's skull. Look, if this guy turns out not to be batshit insane, and he comes out and says "I did it cause Sarah Palin told me to," then I'll say Palin bears responsibility Up until that point, it's far from provable who or what influenced this douchebag to do what he did."

There's a difference between a cause and a sole cause. You should reflect on that for a while.

Quote :

"Given that that isn't the actual definition of "cause," I'd say that people are right to question if the rhetoric played a part. Leave it to a liberal to completely redefine a word in order to advance an argument"

Except it is an actual definition of cause
http://www.amazon.com/Causality-Reasoning-Inference-Judea-Pearl/dp/0521773628
http://www.amazon.com/Causation-Prediction-Adaptive-Computation-Learning/dp/0262194406

Entire branches of work in machine learning are done with this interventional interpretation of causation (if that's how you'd like to say it), better known by some people as the "wiggle" theory; A causes B to the extent that wiggling A causes B to wiggle.

1/9/2011 6:40:27 PM

Quote :

"Given that that isn't the actual definition of "cause," I'd say that people are right to question if the rhetoric played a part. Leave it to a liberal to completely redefine a word in order to advance an argument"

people blame Eminem, Grand Theft Auto Video Game, Marylyn Mason all the time in these situations because of the rhetoric involved. A rapper says i have someone in my crosshairs, it's considered premeditated murder. Sarah Palin says it, it's considered a survey marker...

1/9/2011 6:49:11 PM

Violent political rhetoric may have played a part but I'm more concerned with a couple other factors like:

1) how did someone this mentally disturbed purchase a gun legally and
2) why did he not get the help he obviously and desperately needed

1/9/2011 6:56:11 PM

Quote :

"Violent political rhetoric may have played a part but I'm more concerned with a couple other factors like: "

my question is this: Say Kanye West releases a CD with a map of the united states with crosshairs labeling congresspeople who are against rap music. His message was that these people were in the way of his message "being heard". One of those crosshairs gets assassinated, who are all the politicians pointing at then?

1/9/2011 7:20:06 PM

Quote :

"why did he not get the help he obviously and desperately needed"

Who should have paid for that help?

1/9/2011 7:20:14 PM

If he couldnt afford it, then the fed. But most certainly not insurance companies and not medicare. Insurance in public and private forms is why the healthcare system is all fucked up in this country and why he probably didn't get help.

1/9/2011 7:23:45 PM

I think that it's more of a question of why is it always "now that you mention it, his facebook post WERE pretty creppy" or "yeah, he DID talk about violence quite often"

why is it always after the fact that people take time to realize that someone may need to be turned in for their own safety or the safety of others. I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread about his crazy postings on some website....

1/9/2011 7:25:27 PM

Quote :

"I'm willing to bet that if Hitler hadn't killed 6 million jews and started a world war that people would look at him differently, too"

I don't think anyone would have called him a hero for not ruining the world. You generally give praise when someone does something good, not when one refrains from doing bad.

1/9/2011 7:29:24 PM

I hope you don't mean the http://www.abovetopsecret.com website I posted... because 99% of the people posting on there are crazy.

1/9/2011 7:31:45 PM

and so what if he went overboard because of what someone said? Are we going to start banning more types of speech?

Its pretty typical of the left to target the right as the only possible cause of the problem. "If you aren't towing the party line, then you're a violent sociopath bent on killing politicians."

The root cause of all this political animosity is poor education. Without the ability to think rationally people flock to either party in order to satisfy their need to belong. Its the same reason people are religious. It doesnt matter what the message is as long as enough people believe it. Politicians on both sides are more than happy to let it be since they're the primary benefactors of such a system.

I have no idea how to fix it.

1/9/2011 7:31:54 PM

Quote :

"Who should have paid for that help?"

Good question. But someone needs to. Because this is what happens when no one does.

1/9/2011 7:34:34 PM

Oh shit, we totally need to start a horrible meme posting like this Loughner guy.

If I post like Jared Loughner, I will make terrible posts.

I am posting like Jared Loughner.

I am making a terrible post.

[Edited on January 9, 2011 at 7:51 PM. Reason : ]

1/9/2011 7:50:35 PM

Quote :

"And what about taking personal responsibility for the social consequences of your words and actions? Palin's rhetoric creates a culture and a background of aggression in which shit like this can more easily grow. "

"If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" Obama 2008

1/9/2011 8:10:47 PM

^how many threats/shootings came as a result of that?

1/9/2011 8:43:49 PM

I don't blame one saying or campaign poster or whatever, it's this "don't tread on me" kind of fantasy that confirmed this man's worldview.

1/9/2011 8:56:26 PM

^^ So it's only dangerous inflammatory rhetoric fanning the flames of violence if some nut bar can be tenuously connected to some recent thing someone somewhere else said? Otherwise it's just brilliant oration right?

Look, if we're going to talk about a culture of violent political rhetoric, it's been going on for a lot longer than Palin has been in the spotlight. It wasn't Palin burning Bush in effigy and throwing molotov cocktails in protests.

[Edited on January 9, 2011 at 9:14 PM. Reason : sdf]

1/9/2011 9:14:18 PM

You know, I had this nice, long, (in)coherent post that I was going to submit that was completely political, in response to some of you cold, heartless people that want to make every tragedy about Right vs. Left.

This isn't about Right vs. Left.

This guy was crazy, and what he did was evil.

I'm saddened that six people needlessly died because of him.

1/9/2011 9:35:45 PM

^^giffords was receiving threats as a direct reaction to the original posting of the crosshairs pics by palin. she asked palin to tone it down months ago. and palin did nothing of the sort.

now again. is there any history of people receiving death threats who were inspired by the obama quote you listed?

[Edited on January 9, 2011 at 11:09 PM. Reason : .]

1/9/2011 11:09:32 PM

"Gun to a knife fight" is an expression. Calling it violent is the same as saying "kill two birds with one stone" is animal cruelty.

1/9/2011 11:13:50 PM

Jesus titty-fucking Christ.

If anyone interprets "targeting" (an expression, may I add) congressional seats in an election as a message to go out and kill that person...THEN THAT PERSON IS FUCKED IN THE HEAD. I don't know why that's so difficult to understand.

I loathe Sarah Palin, but even remotely pointing the finger at her here is absolutely ridiculous. From what we know about the shooter, it's pretty apparent that him and Palin probably don't have a whole lot in common. Their "motives" were nowhere near the same (if we are to draw any conclusions from the shooters past). The things they care about politically are remarkably different. There is so little connecting the two, it's dumbfounded that I've seen so many people try and stretch the situation.

1/9/2011 11:51:45 PM

it's not about the targeting, it's the culture of violent revolution that these people fetishize. Hell the very name "Tea party" does it. It's this kind of stuff on the news shows that validate such a person's worldview.

1/9/2011 11:57:54 PM

Quote :

"it's the culture of violent revolution that these people fetishize"

The only people I know of that do that are communists when they glorify murderers such as Che and Castro. Sarah Palin was a politician and is now a TV celebrity. She does not seem to hang out with or praise the work of murderers. So, who are you talking about? The only actual violence here was the shooter. If anyone called the shooter a hero, then you can say they "fetishize" violent revolution. Until then, you are making shit up.

As for your tea party comment: No lives were lost or even threatened during the boston tea party.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 12:42 AM. Reason : .,.]

1/10/2011 12:40:05 AM

As for your tea party comment: The Tea Party Movement of 2009 had no connection with, and nearly opposite aims to, the Boston Tea Party of 1773; it merely misappropriated the name without understanding its meaning, much as it has done with the Constitution (along with the Constitution Party and nearly every other right-wing organization or movement).

1/10/2011 12:48:14 AM

all sides have a few dickheads, but you don't hear folks on the left spouting "Second Amendment solutions" and such crap nearly as routinely as those on the right. This violent rhetoric has to end: when a schizophrenic kid near you is the next to soak it up, then what?

1/10/2011 12:49:32 AM

Was it not just last month that a leftist environmental group got in trouble for espousing that everyone denying catastrophic global warming was guilty of genocide and if only they could be violently executed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zR73mcZW7B4

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 1:07 AM. Reason : .,.]

1/10/2011 1:05:43 AM

so your response to a discussion on violent rhetoric in american politics is to post a british video about a british climate change initiative where a character who is not doing their part is blown up in a comical way? interesting strategy.

1/10/2011 2:27:00 AM

scrapin' that barrel I see...

Quote :

"why is it always after the fact that people take time to realize that someone may need to be turned in for their own safety or the safety of others. I think it was mentioned earlier in the thread about his crazy postings on some website"

because we aren't a nation of thout police and we hold the spirit of the First Amendment dear

this is part of the cost of freedom

o also the reason we're harsher on Sarah Palin than on Eminem and Kanye is that those guys are entertainers rather than politicians intent on being taken seriously; notice for example how Al Franken turned down the funny as soon as he entered politics, so that the voters would take him seriously

1/10/2011 2:34:53 AM

blaming this on the republicans is just hilarious

the democrats model their party after violent revolutionaries like Che Guevara, yet they think republicans are the violent ones. LOL

This lady needs to say to herself, my god, what have I done?

Sure, this dude seems pretty crazy. But that doesn't mean her actions didn't help put her in his crosshairs.

1/10/2011 2:52:43 AM

Quote :

"the democrats model their party after violent revolutionaries like Che Guevara"

:wat"

1/10/2011 2:56:18 AM

they model their party based off his socialist economic and political ideas

1/10/2011 3:01:33 AM

IIRC the Democrats don't want communal ownership of all property or the expropriation of corporate assets, and they have even made affirmative efforts to entrench the moneyed interests

1/10/2011 3:07:54 AM

well that is true, they do sell out pretty hardcore... i guess i was thinking of their "values" and not really their actions

1/10/2011 3:09:27 AM

Seriously, that statement is about as off-base as the belief that the GOP wants to make this nation a pure nation of white Protestants who will use the homeless as their slaves and keep women popping out babies in the kitchen; these may be elements of the far right but even the horrors that the Rethugnicans do wish to visit upon us aren't that extreme.

1/10/2011 3:20:05 AM

One would think after so many failed experiments that you guys would be willing to relinquish your socialist ideals.

but nope, i guess ignorance is bliss.

It's easy to be a socialist when you have your parents credit card and live in their fully furnished quarters.

I wonder how many of you would be socialists if you were starving and had rags for clothes like people who actually live in the hell that is socialism.

Your all "Che! Viva la revolution"

Until someone gets killed on your side... I guess I just don't understand it. This lady isn't the first person to die for her political beliefs. And she sure as shit didn't die for a noble cause. Fake money and healthcare reform. What a legacy


(okay she's not dead yet but point stands)

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 3:44 AM. Reason : a]

1/10/2011 3:43:38 AM

Quote :

"Your all "Che! Viva la revolution""

I don't know anyone like this and I've definitely never heard a politician even mention Che Guevara. In fact, the only people I ever hear calling for any kind of revolution are Tea Partiers. But I certainly don't lump all Tea Partiers in with that group. Your generalizations are wide and stupid and I feel like you're trolling but in my heart I know you are just mentally deficient.

1/10/2011 4:22:48 AM

mentioning Che is really just a needle. You dont actually say "Che" but that is what I hear when you guys talk about your socialist utopia.

1/10/2011 4:35:35 AM

1/10/2011 4:36:21 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/10/us/10shooter.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&src=ig&adxnnlx=1294660942-qHOtS0eEsaB6FMXh72gd8g

This is the most in depth article on Laughner's political beliefs I've found. Seems like a hodgepodge of radical conspiracy theorist politics.

1/10/2011 7:16:36 AM

^And this guy nailed it. This guy wasn't a liberal, conservative, tea partier, anything. This guy was a nutcase and nothing more.

Quote :

"1) how did someone this mentally disturbed purchase a gun legally and "

Yo guys I'm really happy for you and Imma let you finish your partisan troll-rambling, but this is one of the most relevant questions on this entire page.

The reason is that he passed an FBI background check, and that is all that is required to legally purchase a gun in pretty much every state. Having your classmates know you're nuts and posting insane shit on the internet doesn't mean anyone involved with the gun sale and background check is necessarily going to know.

We can look back and ask that question now, but in the context of how things actually work, it really doesn't make sense. You're not subject to a psych eval when you go to buy a gun. The responsibility of the salesperson is to deny sale to someone they reasonably believe is a prohibited person, or if they fail the FBI check. If the guy acted completely normal there's no reason he would have been too suspicious to sell it to him

Quote :

"2) why did he not get the help he obviously and desperately needed"

In context of how the process works, this really provides the answer to your question, and highlights the most important failing in this situation. In fact, this second question really provides the answer to the first. Had he actually been committed and had medical records diagnosing this kind of instability, he would have failed the check. As a result, I'd say that his ability to legally purchase a gun is primarily the result of failure to act on the part of his parents and those around him.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 7:28 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 7:19:53 AM

Yeah, there hasn't been hardly anything about his parents put out yet. There are a few paragraphs in the NYT article that yall can read (it really is the best look into his life thus far that I've read) on your own.

I'm guessing when we find out more about them it's going to set off another round of debates about parenting and a host of other things.

1/10/2011 7:29:27 AM

True, if someone (his parents, friends, etc) would have spoken up about his batshit craziness, and he would have seen someone, that would have showed up on the background check-especially if he was committed.

The failure here is the people around him didn't really think about the batshit craziness he was spouting and they didn't call a shrink/get this dude some help.

I just hope this doesn't cause a knee jerk reaction causing more unnecessary gun laws.

I do hope the Congresswoman recovers fully, and feel badly for those families who lost a loved one.

1/10/2011 7:33:20 AM

The whole 9-year old girl death just breaks my heart. I mean, the entire thing is immensely sad, but that particular detail is just gut-wrenching.

1/10/2011 7:35:40 AM

I think the most relevant commentary made so far on this shooting is the 1976 film Taxi Driver.

Quote :

""Scorsese and writer Paul Schrader append the perfect conclusion to Taxi Driver. Steeped in irony, the five-minute epilogue underscores the vagaries of fate. The media builds Bickle into a hero, when, had he been a little quicker drawing his gun against Senator Palantine, he would have been reviled as an assassin."

1/10/2011 7:36:19 AM

Quote :

"good ole terp. Last I remember you were trying to get into law school. Hopefully you will one day be able to differentiate between me commenting on how sad it was at how quickly it was politicized and blamed placed based on NO evidence and making fun of an ECONOMIST who decided to jump right into to the same fray that I was being critical of. It might help you in future years. But keep with the name calling, I know you are just venting some anger issues from being a male secretary. I dont take it personally. Good day sir"

You should take it personally, you're an idiot. A guy who prescribes people glasses and calls himself a doctor, lol. Anyway, that was a horrible attempt at trying to rationalizing your full-retard approach to this thread. Also, I'm in school and have never been a secretary. I began school like 2 years ago. You're talking about shit I posted over 2 years ago? What a pathetic life you must have.

1/10/2011 8:46:48 AM

Quote :

"Jesus titty-fucking Christ. If anyone interprets "targeting" (an expression, may I add) congressional seats in an election as a message to go out and kill that person...THEN THAT PERSON IS FUCKED IN THE HEAD. I don't know why that's so difficult to understand. I loathe Sarah Palin, but even remotely pointing the finger at her here is absolutely ridiculous. From what we know about the shooter, it's pretty apparent that him and Palin probably don't have a whole lot in common. Their "motives" were nowhere near the same (if we are to draw any conclusions from the shooters past). The things they care about politically are remarkably different. There is so little connecting the two, it's dumbfounded that I've seen so many people try and stretch the situation."

Nobody's blaming Sarah Palin, they're ascribing some measure of causality to (not just the stupid poster) the culture of violence-imagery and revolution-fantasy that Kris points out. It's hilarious how LoneSnark tries to deny this and any reasonable definition of causality, going instead for the "but we should really be scared of college communists who fantasize about Revolucion" instead of the public, broad-daylight glorification of violent imagery by (what is becoming) a mainstream US political movement.

Quote :

"blaming this on the republicans is just hilarious the democrats model their party after violent revolutionaries like Che Guevara, yet they think republicans are the violent ones. LOL This lady needs to say to herself, my god, what have I done? Sure, this dude seems pretty crazy. But that doesn't mean her actions didn't help put her in his crosshairs."

You can argue against a misinformed interface in your own brain on livejournal, there's no reason to engage it here.

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 8:48 AM. Reason : .]

1/10/2011 8:47:09 AM

Quote :

"The whole 9-year old girl death just breaks my heart. I mean, the entire thing is immensely sad, but that particular detail is just gut-wrenching."

I find it eerie that her birthday was 9/11/2001

1/10/2011 8:52:19 AM

Well apparently it was her birthday that had a lot of an effect on her interest in politics. There's a decent chance that she wouldn't have been there if her birthday had been a day before or after. Or maybe if any number of things had happened to prevent this from happening, like when Cate Blanchett's character broke her leg in Benjamin Button. It's eerie, but in the end it's just a strange coincidence. People born on 9/11 will be dying until they're all gone and every time it happens it'll probably be mentioned.

1/10/2011 8:59:42 AM

Quote :

"Had he actually been committed and had medical records diagnosing this kind of instability, he would have failed the check."

Really? Wouldn't that stuff be subject to HIPAA?

(I'm not really familiar with the scope of an FBI background check and what kind of information they can gather.)

[Edited on January 10, 2011 at 9:22 AM. Reason : .,]

1/10/2011 9:12:33 AM

Quote :

"revolution-fantasy"

Hey, man, he's just rebelling against that police state you keep warning us about.

1/10/2011 9:17:25 AM