Mass Shooting El Paso...

[oxmixmudd]

I would rather they never mentioned his name at all, but they did, and various people are already blaming Trump for his actions. But his manifesto contradicts that lie, so I think it is important that the information is available.

Really - so if it helps protect Trump it's ok to 'take the risk' some other similar ideologue will take up arms for the cause?

Jim

[seanD]

The manifesto was already published online by the shooter. I mean, you are aware this is the age of the internet?

[Bill the Cat]

Really - so if it helps protect Trump it's ok to 'take the risk' some other similar ideologue will take up arms for the cause?

Jim

I see truth really doesn't matter to you as long as the lie makes Trump look worse...

[JimL]

Right. I was referring to cultural and racial homogeny. Japan would perhaps be a better example of a basically homogenous culture and race that currently has a low instance of violence. Armenia would be an example of a fairly racially homogenous nation with a violence problem.

My point is that the US has a large and conflicted population that is divided along several cultural and racial lines. That's where I think the US is unique. And that is where most of our problems of violence stem.

The U.S. doesn't have a large and conflicted population, it has a large and diverse population within the which there is much racism. What you are recognizing is racism, which is connected with tribalism, which is a thing to overcome, not to foster.

[KingsGambit]

I see truth really doesn't matter to you as long as the lie makes Trump look worse...

I don't think that's a charitable interpretation of the post. My original claim is that publicizing the manifesto makes future shootings more likely, and Sparko's point was that the manifesto was used to defend Trump against attacks. I think the argument that preventing more shootings outweighs having it available to defend Trump is a reasonable one.

[KingsGambit]

The manifesto was already published online by the shooter. I mean, you are aware this is the age of the internet?

Yes, but not everybody knows how to reach it or would even be aware of it. Publicizing it presents a wider audience.

To use an analogy, there was a recent case where a local news station accidentally leaked the address of an NFL star, resulting in his privacy being violated. It took me less than five minutes to find it on a government database, but the local news disseminating it had a much wider effect despite the technical ability to find it if you really wanted it.

[seanD]

Yes, but not everybody knows how to reach it or would even be aware of it. Publicizing it presents a wider audience.

To use an analogy, there was a recent case where a local news station accidentally leaked the address of an NFL star, resulting in his privacy being violated. It took me less than five minutes to find it on a government database, but the local news disseminating it had a much wider effect despite the technical ability to find it if you really wanted it.

Unless you can prevent the shooters publishing it online (which is the course they're obviously going to take since this stuff is apparently being fueled on social media), isn't this discussion a moot point?

[seanD]

Yes, but not everybody knows how to reach it or would even be aware of it. Publicizing it presents a wider audience.

To use an analogy, there was a recent case where a local news station accidentally leaked the address of an NFL star, resulting in his privacy being violated. It took me less than five minutes to find it on a government database, but the local news disseminating it had a much wider effect despite the technical ability to find it if you really wanted it.

But you can't stop others from capturing it and uploading it. It'll just spread until it's easily available to those (typically the people we don't want to see it) that want to view it can.

[KingsGambit]

Unless you can prevent the shooters publishing it online (which is the course they're obviously going to take since this stuff is apparently being fueled on social media), isn't this discussion a moot point?

No. The point is not preventing it from being online altogether (that's impossible) but trying to stop it from having as wide a readership.

[seanD]

No. The point is not preventing it from being online altogether (that's impossible) but trying to stop it from having as wide a readership.

This is dumb though. The potential young shooters who are privy to the internet will easily find it if they want to.

[KingsGambit]

This is dumb though. The potential young shooters will easily find it if they want to.

Did you even read my post? I acknowledged that people who really want to find it really will (like my point with the Chiefs player address), but that the goal is stopping those who wouldn't necessarily be looking for it.

[Bill the Cat]

The U.S. doesn't have a large and conflicted population, it has a large and diverse population within the which there is much racism. What you are recognizing is racism, which is connected with tribalism, which is a thing to overcome, not to foster.

It's not racism...

[seanD]

Did you even read my post? I acknowledged that people who really want to find it really will (like my point with the Chiefs player address), but that the goal is stopping those who wouldn't necessarily be looking for it.

But the people not looking for it, the vast majority of the population, won't be influenced to go shoot people by a manifesto. So it's pointless. The argument is to somehow keep the manifesto out of the view of those that WILL be influenced to go on shooting sprees, but you can't.

[KingsGambit]

To take the logic of not stopping anything that's already on the Internet already... there is child porn on the Internet. I don't know how you would actually access it but some people do, and I have no interest in making it any easier.

[KingsGambit]

But the people not looking for it, the vast majority of the population, won't be influenced to go shoot people by a manifesto. So it's pointless. The argument is to somehow keep the manifesto out of the view of those that WILL be influenced to go on shooting sprees, but you can't.

This still doesn't get to the heart of what I'm getting at.

The purpose of not spreading the manifesto isn't because the readers will be inspired to commit mass shootings. It's because people who shoot and leave a manifesto want something to be read by a very wide audience. If we reduce that very wide audience, one possible motivation to go on a shooting spree is reduced.