I lit up my smart phone this morning and opened the link to Drudge and blurted out “Oh no, oh no, oh no.” As the facts of the horrible church shooting unfold, I hear the echoes of the Sandy Hook mass murder. Sandy Hook is not far from where I live and a good number of people we know were connected to it. Sadly, history repeats because someone failed to learn from it.
Adam Lanza was mentally ill. Although it has not been disclosed, you can bet your life he was on SSRI medications. The refusal to disclose is your proof. Lanza was allowed free access to weapons despite his condition.
Deja vu.
Dylann Storm Roof has been identified as the suspect in the killing of nine black people in Charleston, SC. Let’s tick off the warning signs and things done wrong.
1. Criminal past
He had a arrest record for drugs and trespassing.
2. Racism
He was a racist
The patches are of white-rule Rhodesia and apartheid-era South Africa
3. Allowed free access to weapons
Despite his overt racism and his criminal past, his father bought him a gun for his 21st birthday.
The last shoe to drop will be any medications Roof was taking for a mental illness. Roof clearly is mentally ill. I have previously argued against the mentally ill having access to weapons but that’s a slippery potential slope in this Obama fascist state. It’s no stretch to imagine Obama one way or the other finding all legal gun owners mentally impaired by Executive Order.
It is my opinion that the Roof’s father ought to be tried as an accessory to murder. Dylan Roof was wearing the signs that screamed “Don’t give me a weapon” and dad ignored them. Or perhaps, did he encourage them? I’d never in a million years allow my son(s) to wear those badges but I never had to worry about it either.
There is considerably more to be learned here, but I will wager that the more is disclosed, the more similar Dylann Roof becomes to Adam Lanza. And as in Sandy Hook this won’t be about guns- it will be about mental illness.
Roof’s uncle described Roof as ‘quiet, soft spoken.’ “Nobody in my family had seen anything like this coming.”
That always seems to be case, doesn’t it?
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
Yeah, the kid is wacked.
Yeah, the father is an accessory to murder.
Yeah, the mentally ill shouldn’t be allowed access to or ownership of guns.
But then you site Obama as a possible reason to let mentally ill people have guns?
Your “slippery slope” allusion and:
“It’s no stretch to imagine Obama one way or the other finding all legal gun owners mentally impaired by Executive Order”
is nothing more than incendiary partisan hyperbole intended to confuse and distract from the real issue.
Obama has absolutely no power to circumvent the constitutionally protected rights of gun owners, and you know it.
Shame on you, DrJohn.
drugs and mental illness? so anyone who has been convicted of a drug offense or flunked a drug test should be excluded from owning a gun ?
I guess we need to modify the 2nd Amendment.
@George Wells:
Really? How about all the agencies of the Federal government buying up so much ammunition that it becomes rare to non-existent on store shelves, for one?
It is no stretch of the imagination to picture this Catch-22 from Obama’s government:
If you are mentally ill, you cannot own a weapon. Only the mentally ill would want to own a weapon. So, if you want a weapon, you are mentally ill. (Actually, that is the argument of most of the far left disarmists as it is).
Oh, you can bet your bottom dollar Obama and his minions will make the most of this tragedy; it’s what they do… Obama has already begun.
Lanza’s mother was trying to have Adam committed to a mental hospital, but the ACLU had blocked those efforts. The left is not willing to take the steps needed to reduce gun violence, which they really don’t care about anyway. ALL they care about is disarming the public. And their weak policies on proven violent criminals assures them of a plentiful supply of tragedies to exploit to that end.
Shame on YOU, George, for supporting such a regime.
@George Wells:
Apparently George has missed this regime taking guns from vets
@George Wells
Here ya go, George.
http://dailycaller.com/2015/04/21/va-sends-veterans-medical-info-to-fbi-to-get-their-guns-taken-away/
I’ll accept your apology any time.
@Bill:
Bill
The CT legislature killed a bill that would allowed treatment of Lanza
It’s unfortunate he was taken alive. His dad had to have known how his son was and the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.
My heart goes out to the families and friends of all the victims of Roof’s shooting.
After Sandy Hook, Obama (and other lefties) proposed three gun control ideas that they want.
Obama came out today and reiterated that he wants gun control measures above and beyond what are on the books today.
So, would any of the new ideas (had they become law) have made a difference?
No.
1. ban so-called “assault weapons.”
2. limit the size of commercially available magazines.
3. force all the states to require background checks when a firearm is privately transferred.
Roof used a handgun, not an ”assault weapon.”
Roof reloaded as many times as he wanted (5 times) so a bigger magazine was irrelevant.
Roof was a family member which is always exempted from background checks for gun transfers.
Now, daddy is an idiot, and maybe he was aware enough of his son’s mental breakdown to be criminally liable for his son’s shooting spree.
But no new laws proposed by liberals, even by Obama, would have prevented this shooting.
Obama didn’t even wait until the bodies of those poor people were cold before he used the incident to push his agenda.
And his agenda wouldn’t have made a bit of difference.
Mediate has an interview with ”a friend” of Roof’s.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/charleston-suspects-roommate-attack-had-been-planned-for-six-months/
1. the attack had been planned out for at least six months.
2. Roof said he wanted to start a civil war.
3. Roof took a lot of drugs.
4. Roof’s family took the gun away from him but he ”stole” it back for the attack.
“…. that’s a slippery potential slope in this Obama fascist state.”
Never pass an opportunity to make a cheap shot and outright lies. Obama has made NO attempts to restrict the Second Amendment. In fact, it could be said he’s help gun nuts like no President in recent history by allowing weapons to be carried in National Parks.
And your ‘fascist state’ comment. Please do, give me the details of this bullshit statement.
@MisterJ: Fascist state—This is what the reactionaries, the tea partiers and the racists here wish to call the current Administration. They are filled with hatred—white supremacists unable to cope with their loss of privilege. Less than 4 generations removed from slavery they fought to preserve they proudly fly the confederate flag over the South Carolina state house while nine lay dead in a Charleston House of God,
WHERE IS THE CONDEMNATION OF THE MINDSET THAT HAS BROUGHT THIS ABOUT?
@Rich Wheeler #11:
Not that anyone here cares, but I’ll toss in my condemnation of that racist mindset.
I’ll agree with Nanny G that the three “proposals” she noted would not have made any difference in the Roof case, exactly as they would have made no difference in the Lanza case, but I don’t really think that’s the issue. I caught Obama’s little talk this afternoon, and what I heard was his admission that the gridlock in Washington made any political solution to these sorts of tragedies impossible at this time.
And for the life of me, I can’t see how the ACLU is complicit in either case.
Bill’s claim that Liberals are soft on “proven violent criminals” has a similar failure in these cases – neither Roof or Lanza was a “proven violent criminal” that, as Nanny G pointed out, even the Left’s proposed tighter gun controls would have affected.
$hit happens, and in an angry society that has a surplus of weaponry, stuff like this is unavoidable.
Taking guns away from vets?
Really, DrJohn?
Are you REALLY going to argue that mentally ill people SHOULD have guns?
Isn’t the Right claiming that the solution to gun violence is already available in our present laws if we would only enforce them?
So when the Veteran’s Administration sends vet’s medical info to the FBI, that’s BAD?
How mentally ill does someone have to be before you’re willing to violate their patient-doctor confidentiality for the sake of the public safety?
Apologize to DrJohn?
I don’t think so.
I support the 2nd amendment rights of mentally competent, law-abiding adult citizens.
I also support aggressive efforts to keep guns out of the hands of people who are NOT mentally competent, law-abiding adult citizens.
@George Wells:
George
You really ought to read a post before you spout off
@George Wells:
From this post:
And, George, there’s even a link to where I argued for it previously!
All the mass murderers we’ve seen are mentally ill. ALL OF THEM. Handing a weapon to one on his birthday is idiocy. Allowing them free access as Lanza’s mother did is IDIOCY.
But doubting that Obama would hesitate to use such a law against most legal gun owners is also IDIOCY.
@rich wheeler:
It’s always interesting, if somewhat disgusting, how the Right reacts to tragedies like these. Over at the National Review there is a multple posts debate regarding how awesome and misunderstood the Confederate Flag is. I’m not kidding, take a look. When some d bag writing for the preeminent conservative publication’s first instinct is to fret over the besmirching of stars and bars, does that tell us anything?
As for Dr john, aside from his involuntary Obama pathology, we should remember that there is nothing he relishes more than writing about black people shot dead. His preferred analysis is to explain exactly why they deserved death from examining their Facebook pages or other ghoulish invasions of their privacy. God forbid one of these victims ever wore a hoodie.
@MisterJ:
You mean outside of telling what we can eat, where we are to live, what we say and crushing Christianity? Making us all subject to “international law” would subjugate our Constitution.
@Tom:
Tom
Obama is a pathological liar. It is from that point where all discussions must begin.
@Tom:
Which is why I reacted this morning with such sadness. And it is why I was called a liberal elsewhere this morning because I opined that our hearts should go out to the families of the victims. You truly are a moron and you are sick. You are entirely unaccustomed to people with principles.
My son lives with a Nigerian woman. She’s a wonderful young lady. I’d take a bullet for her. Not for you.
@George Wells: @Tom:
I was hoping the kid would not be taken alive.
I had it all right. All of it. The racism, the drugs, the mental illness. My diagnosis was spot on.
I even said I thought the dad should be charged as an accessory to murder.
This is a horror.
But you, tweedle dum and tweedle dee, had to show everybody how poor was your reading comprehension and how you would not let facts impair your blather. Neither of you has had an innocent life fade in your hands despite your best efforts to prevent it. The color of the skin is unimportant. Every time something like this happens, I have a flashback- to more than one event; children, young adults and older people.
Neither of you understands what principles are.
You two are quite the spectacle. Thanks for that.
@George Wells: FYI My lovely wife and I marched in the Gay Pride Parade in L.A. last Sunday–a great event enjoyed by thousands. We march for all-that are oppressed–Mercy For Animals.
And less than 3 generations ago, Native Americans were being slaughtered under the flag that now proudly flies on every
concentration campreservation inside the boundries of the United States.The War of Northern Aggression ended 150 years ago. Get over it.
And who objects to the mind set that gave Metals of Honor to soldiers who committed outright genocide like the Buffalo Soldiers did? Ever heard of any one being given a Metal of Honor, or having a museum build in honor of those who slaughtered unarmed blacks?
Whites killed blacks; blacks killed Native Americans; Native Americans killed whites. No race is without its shame.
The shooter in South Carolina is an example of pure evil. But you liberals don’t want to admit that there is simply evil in this world. We don’t understand it and we don’t condone it, but if you can garner some political points off it, people like you will be the first to step up to the plate to do so.
Funny how the left, and even those dimwits on the right, want to label the South Carolina a “racist” when the left wouldn’t label the Fort Hood shooter a jihadist. I don’t know if the South Carolina shooter is, or is not, racist. I just know he is evil just as the ISIS jihadists are evil.
@drjohn:
You need to add Wheeler to that list, so I fixed it for you.
@drjohn:
That’s wonderful. I’m glad you make exceptions for blacks dating your sons. It will make the parents of that black teenager in Texas in the bikini being kneeled on for several minutes feel so much better about what you had to say about their daughter
How’s that pedestal you placed George Zimmerman on looking lately? A little soft?
If you think you’re better than a neo Nazi or an admitted white supremacist, you’re wrong. Those people are menaces, but known evils. People like you, in practical terms, do 100 times the damage. Your thin veneer of plausable deniability allows you to operate in public directly against the interests of people who aren’t in your white conservative power structure. But anyone with half a brain knowns you’re no better.
@retire05:
I have more respect for Rich than for the other two. They are not worthy of anyone’s respect.
@Tom:
Concessions? Tom, you ought to stop talking before you really make as ass of yourself.
That’s how we raised our kids. We’re not racists. We are highly principled.
I never put Zimmerman on a pedestal. I just believed he was telling the truth that time. I still do. He is a bonehead.
I am a staunch supporter of Tim Scott, Clarence Thomas, and Allen West. My boys were weaned on Walter Williams and Tom Sowell.
You lefties call them “house ni**ers” and “Uncle Toms” because they wandered off the liberal plantation. You never hear that from me. Never. I went to bat for the cops in Baltimore and NY. You long to see them dead.
Don’t lecture me.
@drjohn:
Unless you can prove I said any of that, it’s all lies.
Would you like to revisit some of the things you’ve written about murdered black teens?
@Tom:
Would you like to tell us what you, or any other race pimp like Sharpton or Jackson, have ever done to end the slaughter of black teens by other blacks?
You need to sweep your own steps before you start complaining about others.
@retire05:
So should we let him go free and declare open season on black people until all your conditions are satisfied? Such a bizarre fantasy, even for an old school white supremacist.
I read that from a certain date, which I don’t remember, all of the mass shootings have been done by people on antidepressant drugs, and in gun free zones.
@retire05:#21 “I don’t know if the South Carolina shooter is or is not racist.” You’re serious?
@Tom:
Feel free.
As much of an idiot as he is, Holder dropped the investigations of Zimmerman.
Darren Wilson was exonerated by the facts
I think the Baltimore cops – black and white- are being ramrodded and I believe most of the case will fizzle.
Roof is mentally ill and he is a racist.
You’ve been consistently wrong. We write posts and you brain dead liberals come here and spew ad hominem at us instead of debating the facts. That is liberalism at its finest.
What grates you the most is that I’ve been right.
@George Wells:
George
Which of the mass murderers was a vet?
Lanza?
Loughner?
Cho?
Holmes?
And yet Obama would take weapons from vets. His administration declared them threats to society.
Only one recent vintage mass murderer was even in the armed forces. A Muslim.
A serious person would address the issue of mental illness and guns in a serious fashion.
@DrJohn #14:
“All the mass murderers we’ve seen are mentally ill. ALL OF THEM. Handing a weapon to one on his birthday is idiocy. Allowing them free access as Lanza’s mother did is IDIOCY.”
I believe that I already agreed with this completely.
But you didn’t establish any grounds for wildly speculating that “doubting that Obama would hesitate to use such a law against most legal gun owners is also IDIOCY.”
Obama clearly isn’t an ardent supporter of the second amendment, but you cannot take that point and inflate it into an attack on the right to bear arms. Obama knows that Washington is powerless to alter the timber of the gun rights discussion, much less change the Law OR THE CONSTITUTION. He has made this point repeatedly. His point is that we are currently incapable of preventing such carnage – we don’t have anything to fight this with. My question to those who continue to insist that existing laws ARE adequate is:
“Which existing law is it that would have prevented this tragedy HAD IT BEEN MORE ENTHUSIASTICLY ENFORCED?”
Simply accusing Obama of WANTING to eliminate guns doesn’t mean that he has any power to do so, and making such an incendiary charge politicizes an issue that needs bipartisan resolution.
Since you correctly note the mental illness connection in these cases, why don’t you explain what the next step is? What sort of government surveillance of citizens will it take to prevent this sort of thing? Mandatory psych evaluations? Minimum IQ requirements? Won’t a Bureau of Gun Ownership Assessment just be an excuse to EXPAND big government? Gonna raise taxes to pay for it?
@retire05 #21:
Ummmm, my #12:
Maybe it’s time for you to note that I’m not quite so liberal as you’d like me to be.
Really?
You don’t have enough evidence?
Roof’s racism doesn’t hit you in the face like a fast-moving cinderblock?
I thought that you were a better judge of character…
@DrJohn #32:
Ummm, my apologies, but I missed this declaration. As a vet, I don’t recall getting any friction over my gun ownership, and I’m not screened aggressively or unusually by the TSA. I’m thinking that maybe you’ve left something out here, or that you’ve wildly exaggerated some minor policy that was meant to alert appropriate agencies to the existence of veterans who had been diagnosed with PTSD, as this is a form of mental illness that can seriously impact the public safety.
But I’m seeing that you believe that letting mentally ill people have guns is OK, simply because Obama believes differently.
WOW!
“Only one recent vintage mass murderer was even in the armed forces. A Muslim.”
And one’s too many, but again, what’s the fix? Can you suggest a blood test that will reveal a Muslim? Want to restrict gun ownership rights to only Southern Baptists?
The gun-control debates always seem to wage over 2 aspects:
1) Would stricter gun control measures make law-abiding citizens safer?
2) Do gun control measures violate the 2nd amendment?
But I suspect many pro-guns-rights advocates are not arguing these points in good faith.
A hypothetical to check where your values lie:
If it were conclusively demonstrated that
1) amending the Constitution to repeal the 2nd amendment, and
2) banning all handguns (and weaponry capable of firing more than one or two shots per minute)
would cut gun homicides by 90%, would you support our Congress doing so?
I don’t keep guns in my house; a friend of mine does. After good-natured back-and-forth debate over the matter, I think the difference comes down to this: Even if it were a fact that, statistically speaking, he and his family are significantly more likely to experience a fatal shooting in their home than me and my family are, he’d still opt to keep the guns.
Why? Say the odds of one of his family members dying by gunfire in the home this year are 6:1,000,000, compared to 2:1,000,00 for my family. However, the odds of his family members dying defenselessly (being unarmed with their lives at the mercy of household intruders) are only 1:,1,000,000 compared to 2:1,000,000 for mine (those being the only circumstances under which gun deaths would occur in my home). His position is that he’d rather have a 50% chance vs. a 0% chance to defend his family from armed criminals, even if it means an overall increased likelihood of death of his family.
To me, his position is irrational: dead is dead. I’ll take whatever’s behind the door with a 33% smaller chance of having to bury my wife and/or children, please. To him, my position is irrational: he’ll take whatever is behind the door that gives him the best chance to defend his family from armed assailants.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but even IF the above stats about household safety were spot on, I suspect many guns-rights-advocates would consider my friend’s stance to be the more rational.
At its core, I think gun-rights advocacy has never really been about safety in absolute terms, nor about constituional rights (be honest: if the Congress repealed the 2nd amendment, would you REALLY be okay with giving up your guns?). Instead, I think it’s about the psychology of how much control one has over their fate.
Am I completely off base in this?
@drjohn:
A racist who declared he wants to start a race war. His declaration at the Church: “I have to do it. You’re raping our women and taking over the country. You have to go.”
There are mentally ill and dangerous people who are succeptible to toxic ideologies and racial fear mongering. I wonder what a pundit such as yourself has offered to the national conversation, Dr John? What’s the message you’re consistently sending out onto the Internet?
@drjohn:
That’s really quaint that you believe the venomous garbage you spew forth onto the Internet somehow can be proven objectively “right”.
One of your greatest pieces was this one
In which you advance the argument that a teenagers Facebook screen grabs can be fodder for determining, not the legality of his death, but more fundementally, if we’re okay with it given his “thug” nature. By diminishing his life you diminish his killer’s responsibility, is that how it works? Most people who die aren’t subjected to such a post-mortem accounting of their life’s value. But this is the important work you’re doing and you’re always right.
This tragedy provides proof of several different cultural conditions while at the same time, for some, validating some long-held prejudices for others.
The black members of an almost-all black church invited a white stranger into their prayer meeting. No doubt, not every black church would do this, nor would every white church, but THIS church opened its doors to a guy of a different race they did not know. Likewise, the reaction of universal condemnation from ALL whites that has spoken on the matter reveals a lack of animosity towards blacks that is supposed to be pervasive and prevalent. So, apparently, before this tragedy took place, there were all black groups that would welcome a white stranger into their midst and there was NOT the hatred of blacks and desire for ill-fate that one would imagine, if one listened only to certain voices in the media.
On the other hand, the action of this embarrassment to the human race, not to mention specifically to white people, must serve to confirm, to those predisposed to believe it anyway, that this is what is in the heart of every white American, not to mention every American gun owner. Likewise, the actions of the likes of Sharpton, the New Black Panthers, Obama himself, Eric Holder and Marilyn Mosby, to name but a few, and the REaction most of these, and more, will have to this tragic event, will serve to reinforce what some believe to be in the hearts and minds of every black person.
So, there are two dynamics at work here, but only one is self-propelled. They dynamic of the gradual but inevitable erosion of racial prejudice and animus appears to be a self-healing process that, if simply left alone and to its own devices, will eventually heal whatever racial divide exists in this country.
The other dynamic is artificial, insidious and man-made. It requires effort and skill, time and money and an amoral, devious mind. It requires the search for tragedies such as this in order to sustain its life, to provide a growth culture, to make it robust and vibrant. It requires constant artificial reinforcement for it to survive, and survive it must for it is the reason for being for its benefactors and beneficiaries.
We see here those that are on board with the first dynamic, feeling empathy and sympathy for those tragically affected by the insane acts of a genetic throw-back of a so-called human being. We also, right here and now, see those riding the express train of the second dynamic, giving it validity and support and doing all to keep it healthy and growing. How utterly pathetic.
@rich wheeler:
Yep, I’m serious. You see, Rich, I have not sat on the jury that found the South Carolina shooter guilty. I have not heard all the evidence, presented by the prosecution in order to make the determination that he is, in fact, a racist. I believe he is guilty of the crimes he is accused of committing, but to label him a racist, without ALL the evidence on that claim being presented to me, I am not willing to make that declaration, and it is moot anyway. See, I believe in our system of juris prudence.
I also believe that he is guaranteed his day in court, and if found guilty (which I’m sure he will be), is also guaranteed his right to appeal. If the verdict of “guilty” is upheld, then as far as I am concerned that is where it should end. Strap his ass into Old Sparky and pull the lever. Send him to Hell post haste.
What the hell does it matter what he was thinking when he shot those nine people? They are just as dead, and would be just as dead no matter what he was thinking. I don’t support hate crime laws. If you kill someone, we should kill you back. What does labeling the crime a “hate” crime do more in a case that is already a death penalty case? You can’t execute someone twice. Hate crime laws are a joke. What benefit did those laws provide for Channon Christian or Christopher Newsome?
And unlike you liberals, I am not concerned why he killed those nine people. I don’t care if he had a lousy childhood, was a druggie, or suffered from any kind of mental delusions, I care about the act he committed, as an adult, and that, the act, is what he will be punished for. And the sooner he returns to dust the better.
And I see nothing has changed with you. You are still great on asking questions but lousy when it comes to answering them.
@Tom:
Seems you have not read the FBI stats. More whites are murdered by blacks than blacks that are murdered by whites. 93% of all blacks are murdered by other blacks. Seems that the “open season” you claim is on blacks is being carried out by other blacks.
I’m now a “white Supremacist?” I thought The Supremes were all black. And don’t you have to be white to be a “white supremacist?” Were your ancestors “black supremacists” when they were committing genocide against my ancestors?
@Bill:
I’m glad you’ve found such a silver lining in the racist murder of nine innocents. I wonder if most black Americans share your view that ignoring violent white supremely is the best course. Maybe in a hundred years, after God knows how many more innocents are dead, their descendants will reap the benefit of your approach. Or maybe not. At least you get to feel better now about your strategy of doing nothing and ignoring the obvious. Meanwhile you frequent a website that periodically ginns up white fears of a race war at the hands of Holder/Obama/New Black Panthers/etc. Apparently inflammatory rhetoric from the Right is exempt from your it should be “left alone” moratorium on the conversations about racism.
@Rich Wheeler #20:
Thanks for your kind words and support.
My, but the climate has changed, hasn’t it?
@retire05 #40:
and:
The lad’s confession speaks for itself.
Has your ability to judge character suddenly failed you?
Odd that you can make the bold leap of logic that allows you to BELIEVE that Roof is guilty, but you can’t trust his own acknowledgement sufficiently for YOU to consider him a racist?
What impossibly high standard of evidence do you require to make that call?
Must God Himself point out the obvious, perhaps burning the word “racist” across the boy’s forehead?
You are overly protective of racists, which begs the question of WHY?
@George Wells:
And you are overly full of shite.
I don’t care if the South Carolina shooter is a racist. I don’t really give a damn why he did what he did. I only care that he is punished for what he did. And unlike you, I will not type his name and give him the notoriety that he desires.
“Hate” crime laws are nothing but feel good, useless laws designed to make ignorant liberals like you think that we are doing something, anything, to punish people more than they would normally be punished. What are you proposing? That we put slugs like the South Carolina shooter to death twice?
As I said, try him. If he is found guilty, grant him an appeal. Once the system has been exercised,. put him in Old Sparky and pull the lever. End of story. No bullshit hate crime laws required.
@retire05 #45:
The motivation behind a crime is important to determine because when a pattern emerges in which a number of similar crimes are all MOTIVATED by the same socio-pathology, a socio-systemic problem that needs to be addressed can be discovered.
While there are way more white churches than black churches, I’m going to go out on a limb and suggest that more black churches have been burned to the ground and that more blacks have died inside of their churches at the hands of RACIST whites than is the case in the reverse.
Leaving the root cause of such crimes unaddressed insures that no correction will ever occur, something that you evidently desire.
Treating the symptom without ever looking for the pathogen that causes it is a sure way to perpetuate the disease.
@George Wells: “The moral arc of the universe is long but it always bends towards justice.” MLK
I had hoped the old supremacists were dying off but then we see this 21 year old kid. Continue to stand for the oppressed. Be a voice for the voiceless.
Spend a moment with Dr.Will Tuttle’s World Peace Diet video and give me your feedback–pun intended—-Thanks
Tom You continue to amaze and delight this reader Keep up the fight.
@Tom:
I’m going to hazard a guess here and say you mean “white supremacy”
In addition, I see you are a person adept at missing the point. If the majority have NOT gotten past the race relations from 100 or so years ago, many have. And, they have done soDESTPITE attitudes such as yours. You cling to that second scenario, one who sees all the political gain to derive from stoking racial tensions and hatred and keeping them high.
Other than the denunciation of such left wing stupidity, proven false yet still, to this day, clung to, such as “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”, why don’t you show me what the “inflammatory rhetoric from the Right” actually is.
I would postulate that had the left not made a false, inflammatory call to arms out of the justified killing of Michael Brown, there would not have been any dead cops in New York City and there would have been not killings in the Emanuel A.M.E. Church. YOUR rhetoric is what is causing death and destruction, Tom, not the rhetoric in response to the death and destruction you have wrought.
But your already knew that, didn’t you, Tom?
@George Wells:
You’re assuming that there is a pattern exhibited from this one case. Pure psychobabble crap. You’re also assuming that if there is a pattern, it can be resolved by someone addressing it? Who would that someone be? The government?
and fearful that limb just might get sawed out from underneath you, you add a caveat of:
Where does it matter where any innocent dies? Does it really matter the intention of the killer? Oh, yes, let’s do psychoanalyze it beyond all common sense because to do otherwise the left would have to admit that there is actually evil in the world, and we can’t have that.
So how many black churches have been burned, George? Give me a number and a time frame. Who burned them? How many blacks died in those black churches? Again, number and time frame? Now, how many white, or multi-racial churches have been burned in the same time frame?
Corrected by whom? How do you correct that which is simply evil?
So we should not treat cancer until we find a cause?
Is there any question this scumbag killed these people solely because they were Black? He proclaimed that.Should we not believe him? Does that make him a racist.
Could you repeat the question Richard.
Sure The shooter said he shot these people because they were Black. Does that make him a racist?
I’ll pass on that one Richard–your next question please.