Author Topic: It has been 4... 0 days since the last mass shooting official shooting thread  (Read 187502 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
The ok sign thing is a part of their operations. They can’t outright say,”this is a sign of white supremacy” so they hide behind something ordinary like an ok sign. They also did so just when that game was really taking off as a meme on social media. So they take something people known of and use it as a signal, and if you get it you’re one of them. But it’s so ordinary that you look crazy when you say,”this is a sign used by fascists” and they can wave it off by saying,”it’s just an okay sign!”

This is the danger with a lot of these modern white supremacy movements: they’re able to spread via wit and hide in plain sight because they know their views do not have social capital.

It’s also why the El Paso shooter used both left and right ideology in his manifesto. It’s to mask his true meaning to the partisans while actual white supremacists get the message.

But common people will catch on, and the problem with people catching on is that they will try to implement the easiest solution and blaming a escape goat. I think 8chan deserves to being called out because the community seems more genuinely not mind the enabling of this shit, but we see people immediately trying to find easy targets for their own interests. It feels like a vicious circle of perpetual misinformation and evasion.

Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
Here is the problem: there is a lot of fools out there and making fools of themselves not exactly once in a while. And worse, a lot of these fools don’t like to learn about it.
I don't know enough normies to have a sense of how much of a concern this actually is. :doge They're certainly useful as a totem for the other side of the trench, that's true.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
The way I see it, you need to fix the following
- The 24/7 news cycle which basically turns any minor issue or incident into the next apocalypse (All US news outlets are laughable in this regard)
- The gun laws, which literally allow anyone to buy a gun without checks
- The immigration policy itself (this is about trust in government more than anything, if the population feels like things are under control they are less likely to try and find solutions on their own.
Again both parties actively create the image that the system is completely broken (border patrol = concentration camps! vs. immigration = invasion!))

A lot of people still seem to underestimate the effect of 9/11, the war on terror and the following economic crisis. I don't think it is a surprise that pretty much all shootings are carried out by males age 20 - 30.
Who when coming of age woke up each day with the "TERROR ALERT" and lost all trust and confidence in their government. These people exist and dwell beyond the set political boundaries of left/right which they gave up on a long time ago.

It is not just the 20 mass shootings but also stuff like self immolation on the White House lawn and the dramatic rise in suicides which all seem to have the same root causes.
An ever growing part of the population is acting and behaving like a doomsday cult.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 08:25:29 PM by Nintex »
🤴

OnlyRegret

  • <<SALVATION!>>
  • Senior Member
Yeah, the environmental activism leaning doomsday is somewhat looking to be linked to an ecoterrorism movement. Some people want to protest the government into environmental reforms others want to shoot their way to a green future  :-\ :-\ :-\

Guns function as a sort of safety blanket. The scarier the world looks the harder the blanket is clutched.

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
The thing about ecoterrorism is that its pretty easy to do without harming anyone or at least minimizing life lost.  So assuming that there are effective forms of terrorism, this is probably the least useful way of achieving those goals and will probably just lead to a lot of fed resources being wasted watching people who just want to mess with whaling boats or break forestry equipment. 

Himu

  • Senior Member
The way I see it, you need to fix the following
- The 24/7 news cycle which basically turns any minor issue or incident into the next apocalypse (All US news outlets are laughable in this regard)
- The gun laws, which literally allow anyone to buy a gun without checks
- The immigration policy itself (this is about trust in government more than anything, if the population feels like things are under control they are less likely to try and find solutions on their own.
Again both parties actively create the image that the system is completely broken (border patrol = concentration camps! vs. immigration = invasion!))

A lot of people still seem to underestimate the effect of 9/11, the war on terror and the following economic crisis. I don't think it is a surprise that pretty much all shootings are carried out by males age 20 - 30.
Who when coming of age woke up each day with the "TERROR ALERT" and lost all trust and confidence in their government. These people exist and dwell beyond the set political boundaries of left/right which they gave up on a long time ago.

It is not just the 250 mass shootings but also stuff like self immolation on the White House lawn and the dramatic rise in suicides which all seem to have the same root causes.
An ever growing part of the population is acting and behaving like a doomsday cult.

You're spouting the 250 mass shootings number while also saying a big problem is the 24/7 news cycle when that 250 mass shootings number is one purported by mass media agencies. It's a false number. 250 mass shootings is over 1 per day.

A more accurate number as per AP.

https://www.apnews.com/084d5015fc544b359721e651c9e4d322

Then they keep running with that number. Just like how politicians can spout "30,000 American deaths to gun violence" when 2/3rds of those are suicides and not homicides. Tragic, but definitely not gun violence. Then news people let the politician get away with using false numbers for their advantage to sell a narrative.

And then people wonder why people don't trust the media.

250? You fell for "basically turns any issue or incident [becoming] the next apocalypse " in your own post.

And what happens when people don't trust the media? They go look for alternatives. You can look up the 250 or 30,000 gun deaths stat very easily via the internet. Shit, I looked up FBI death stats myself just by googling, and compared them with ones on news reports just a few years ago. And once that trust is lost you get people watching stupid Youtube recs and Fox News and the circle is complete.

Your post, although not on purpose, very adeptly shows how people are radicalized.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2019, 07:09:30 PM by Cindi Mayweather »
IYKYK


Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
It depends on your definition of mass shootings I suppose but the 250 number comes from here:
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

These shootings weren't all deadly(so there might be a discrepancy there) but they are real incidents.

The guns are used as the tool to enact change because they are the most powerful and practical tools the shooters have available.
When there are no guns available they will just try and use something else like cars or trucks so just banning guns won't solve the issue.

The killer made that clear in his manifesto too, the attack was poorly prepared but the weapon he had was most suitable for the 'wake up call' he had in mind.
That however, still does not mean you should not get these guns out of the hands of people who clearly shouldn't have them so background checks are nothing but common sense
and there is no reason for anyone to walk around with an AK47 and a drum magazine.

Anyhow, this ideology is not clearly defined like ideologies of the past like Nazism, Marxism or Islam. It is closest to the stuff you find in a game like Deus Ex or any other fiction about the end or control of society.
Similar to that sort of fiction it is just a zeitgeist accumulation of news media, pop-culture topics and current world affairs that formed an ideology in their minds but doesn't really exist.
However, on a daily basis they get fed enough images and commentary that allows for their confirmation bias to kick in and accept their own mental creation.
This cynical doomsday view of the world is pretty much real to them. Look no further than say a place like NeoGAF or ResetEra where some posters already show the same signs.
🤴

Himu

  • Senior Member
It depends on your definition of mass shootings I suppose but the 250 number comes from here:
https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting

Yes, it depends on the definition, and when you have a very loose definition you can spread misinformation to sell fear. It's agenda ridden.

It's why many black people fall to conspiracy theorism. Why trust patented, official sources when those same official sources said only a decade ago "black man loots, white man finds food"?

As trust in the media drops you will only have more radicals because they're going to alternative new sources because they don't believe anything else.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
Imagine thinking someone shooting themselves in the head isn’t gun violence.

(those stats should be mentioned as suicide, but you could also point out studies that show access to a gun increases someone’s chance of actually killing themselves, it’s not exactly a pro-gun rights stat for anyone not a psychopath)

It is? Japan is has one of the lowest crime rates in the developed world and yet one of the highest suicide rates. Would you label Japan a "violent" nation? No. Why would you lump 20,000 suicides with gun violence. To flex your narrative when you don't have an argument, only fear.
IYKYK

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
The thing about ecoterrorism is that its pretty easy to do without harming anyone or at least minimizing life lost. 

Wait, what?

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
每天生气

Himu

  • Senior Member
Just last year. Parkland happened and the news media went sucking its own cock talking about "THERE HAVE BEEN 18 MASS SHOOTINGS IN JUST THE PAST MONTH ALONE (Parkland happened in February)" :brazilcry

Then a bunch of libs with an agenda spread it on facebook without fact checking.

And oops, WaPo came out with

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/no-there-havent-been-18-school-shooting-in-2018-that-number-is-flat-wrong/2018/02/15/65b6cf72-1264-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html

Bam.

The press allowed a false number to run rampant just because they like the story.

They have an agenda to sell. And people see shit like this, why trust them? Then two months later they're watching Hannity and the press is wondering, dumb-founded,"why don't people trust us?!" :brazilcry Then a few months later you get some whacko who tries to kill people in a restaurant because he heard they're sacrificing babies on Fox News.

And here you are peddling a similarly bullshit stat while talking about the 24/7 media cycle like a spider meeting its prey.
IYKYK

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
I could be wrong here but isn't part of this issue that there are is very minimal federal statistics tracking gun crimes for reasons like the CDCs ban on gun prevention research etc. and because of this every news outlet/ state seems to use their own statistical definitions which get accumulated in weird ways.   

Himu

  • Senior Member
Riotous, nuance matters. The stuff I'm talking about is how Republicans are made every day. If you want to fight Republicans you have to stop lying between your teeth.

Stuff like this is also why people like Dank Dad have gained a platform. Because the news media - which people already don't trust - tried to kill the guy, they latched on to him as a public hero. He was relatively unknown but had a cult before the infamous UK interview. After which, when they unsuccessfully tried to catch him or trip him up, his popularity sky rocketed and he gained a sizable following. The video in question has now been viewed 17 million times.

Ergo, the news is directly responsible with the increasingly extreme right wing. They're pushing them one way and toward another, much worse, alternative.

GG using the 250 stat I guess. I'm sure it won't come back to bite you in the ass.
IYKYK

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
It's not like 'well by my definition there were only 20 mass shooting this year' makes the situation any better. That's still 20 that should/could be prevented.
Switched the number to 20 so we can move from that I suppose.

It is not normal to have so many shootings period, especially not in places like shopping malls, schools, clubs and the likes.
🤴

Himu

  • Senior Member
It's not like 'well by my definition there were only 20 mass shooting this year' makes the situation any better. That's still 20 that should/could be prevented.

It is not normal to have so many shootings period, especially not in places like shopping malls, schools, clubs and the likes.

20 vs 250.

"It's not like 'well by my definition there were only 20 mass shooting this year' makes the situation any better."

That's a massive difference, large enough for people to discount trust in official opinions entirely.

"If they're lying about that what else are they lying about?" and down the rabbithole we go.

And on this day, a new Republican was made.



Whether it's a logical or emotional reaction doesn't matter. That's how it happens.
IYKYK

agrajag

  • Senior Member
you know, it just occured to me Cindi, you can still buy a gun without having to constantly downplay gun violence statistics. I understand you want to be strapped for your own safety, but having to constantly justify it to the people here is what I don't get

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
20 is still multitudes higher than literally every other country in the world though?

Yes but that's not cindy's point.  Its too easy to lie with statistics and if you do it enough people become desensitized to the issue.  So we all think just one mass school shooting is too many but they have now become the norm so the question becomes are they increasing or decreasing, and now we can't have a conversation because we don't trust the stats to base the argument on.  And stats are important for questions like do less guns lead to less suicides because the answer is incredibly complex and you can get wildly different answers depending on how you count things. 

OnlyRegret

  • <<SALVATION!>>
  • Senior Member
To be fair, the US is a considerably large country. Whether it has a higher rate than the EU or South America or whatever comparison group/state you pick, I'm not sure. It seems like it does but that's just going off feel. We're a bit biased in favour of keeping tabs on everything that goes on in the US whereas other places there can be a marked decrease in care.


Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
It's not like 'well by my definition there were only 20 mass shooting this year' makes the situation any better. That's still 20 that should/could be prevented.

It is not normal to have so many shootings period, especially not in places like shopping malls, schools, clubs and the likes.

20 vs 250.

"It's not like 'well by my definition there were only 20 mass shooting this year' makes the situation any better."

That's a massive difference, large enough for people to discount trust in official opinions entirely.

"If they're lying about that what else are they lying about?" and down the rabbithole we go.

And on this day, a new Republican was made.

(Image removed from quote.)

Whether it's a logical or emotional reaction doesn't matter. That's how it happens.
The methodology for the 250 is clearly explained:
Quote
Why are GVA Mass Shooting numbers higher than some other sources?

GVA uses a purely statistical threshold to define mass shooting based ONLY on the numeric value of 4 or more shot or killed, not including the shooter. GVA does not parse the definition to remove any subcategory of shooting. To that end we don’t exclude, set apart, caveat, or differentiate victims based upon the circumstances in which they were shot.
GVA believes that equal importance is given to the counting of those injured as well as killed in a mass shooting incident.

The FBI does not define Mass Shooting in any form. They do define Mass Killing but that includes all forms of weapon, not just guns.

In that, the criteria are simple…if four or more people are shot or killed in a single incident, not involving the shooter, that incident is categorized as a mass shooting based purely on that numerical threshold.

And by that methodology it checks out so it is not a lie. All incidents listed are sourced and have 4 or more people shot (injured and or killed). So there's at least 250 incidents with fire arms that involve at least 4 victims.
Which is a fuck ton of incidents with guns. Now you can of course remove gang violence, non-lethal incidents, family feuds and the likes and not count them and end up at 20. But that doesn't change the fact that all those incidents happened.

And indeed 20 'big shootings(?)' is still a large number way beyond any other country.
Banning military grade hardware and background checks might not end all violence but if you can severely decrease the number of shooting incidents you're already heading in the right direction.

And what do you possibly have to lose? Are you afraid that it might actually work and less people get shot? It seems like something worth trying.
🤴

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
.
每天生气

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
And what do you possibly have to lose?
每天生气


Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Please point out that you need to have at least a masters to be able to relate to the Unibomber Teddy;  he is the academic's terrorist.   

TVC15

  • Laugh when you can, it’s cheap medicine -LB
  • Senior Member
I have everything Ted’s written (that’s been published in a book) :uguu
serge

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
I'm going to exit the group before I get put on a watch list.

Wait you didn't exit once you found out 1) you weren't going to get the leaks and 2) it was run by a white nationalist?

team filler

  • filler
  • filler
My last question is if he posts on neogaf
ask him to unban me!
*****

OnlyRegret

  • <<SALVATION!>>
  • Senior Member
and here we go with the manifesto rifling and my side v other side game

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1158165012864573440

Himu

  • Senior Member
you know, it just occured to me Cindi, you can still buy a gun without having to constantly downplay gun violence statistics. I understand you want to be strapped for your own safety, but having to constantly justify it to the people here is what I don't get

Mostly because unlike you think, I deeply care about fixing this issue and think using false stats that stretch truth is a bad way to go about it which further division and deep trust issues into the fabric in our society. Also earlier we were talking about white nationalists, and while not entirely the same, this is one major manner in which hard right wingers are made. It's an example of how someone can go down the rabbit hole with a little push called disbelief of the mainstream media. It's very hard to get out, so it's very topical to this subject. Basically Democrats and the new using false numbers in gun violence help poison the well regarding the issue, which helps nothing ever changing. You can say,"suicide is still violence" but let's be honest, Democrats are saying,"30,000 people day a year to gun violence and people need to feel safe." They're conflating suicide with homicide, and no matter where you are on that issue, you can't - with any intellectual honesty - come to the conclusion that they're the same. Stuff like this pushes people hand over fist right into Republican arms.

Nothing will change my position on guns however I'm trying to help assist you guys in ways that you may be - albeit, accidentally - disenfranchising others. Because shit like 250 is all over the internet and people who aren't as tied to the democratic platform are watching.
IYKYK

Himu

  • Senior Member
and here we go with the manifesto rifling and my side v other side game

https://twitter.com/RealSaavedra/status/1158165012864573440

Told ya. No one is talking about the white nationalism like I said, they're focusing on "this person was a leftist" "this person was a Trumpist" because of crumbs left. So now the seeds are further sewn to reap even more division. Meanwhile his real intent has been masked.

Chaos, you hath been lit.

IYKYK

OnlyRegret

  • <<SALVATION!>>
  • Senior Member
Which is definitely how I feel but this stuff is a literal game to people.
"Shooter wasn't my side, point for me."

It almost seems like the crux of the matter for some people is that people they don't agree with are doing the shooting.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
HOLY SHIT. EVERYONE SIDE IS A SCUMBAG.  WHY THE FUCK YOU NEED TO KILL PEOPLE JUST TO MAKE A SHITTY POLITICAL POINT.

EightBitNate

  • I don’t wanna be horny anymore, I wanna be happy
  • Senior Member
I think the problem is white people

shosta

  • Y = λ𝑓. (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥)) (λ𝑥. 𝑓 (𝑥 𝑥))
  • Senior Member
Quote
Mexico vows to take legal action against U.S. after deadly El Paso shooting
每天生气

CatsCatsCats

  • 🤷‍♀️
  • Senior Member
Oh wow, I always wondered how many mass shootings we’d need before some kind of international pressure

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Quote
Mexico vows to take legal action against U.S. after deadly El Paso shooting

Is kind of cynical political posturing (they have no chance of extradition and Obrador wants not to be seeing a Trump lapdog) but I don’t feel this is a wrong move and works symbolically.

Oh wow, I always wondered how many mass shootings we’d need before some kind of international pressure

Well, the scumbag probably choose El Paso because a lot of Mexicans go there to shop. (My mother is there in a shopping trip, that’s why I’m kind of extra pissed about all this).

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Quote
I believe there were a few Mexican nationals that were killed in the event

You are correct. Six.

They know that is not going to do shit (Obrador has ‘sued’ Trump before https://www.proceso.com.mx/475170/confirma-amlo-en-chicago-demandara-a-trump-ante-onu-la-cidh-video/amp )

spoiler (click to show/hide)
Obrador is a scumbag, but I don’t see this as a wrong move by default.
[close]

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
wrong thread

Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
HOLY SHIT. EVERYONE SIDE IS A SCUMBAG.  WHY THE FUCK YOU NEED TO KILL PEOPLE JUST TO MAKE A SHITTY POLITICAL POINT.
Because sometimes, the powers that be will look to appease in response. Not to the direct demands, but as a vague grievances attributed to the public. "Not like this, obviously, but clearly we should do something about immigration."

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
HOLY SHIT. EVERYONE SIDE IS A SCUMBAG.  WHY THE FUCK YOU NEED TO KILL PEOPLE JUST TO MAKE A SHITTY POLITICAL POINT.
Because sometimes, the powers that be will look to appease in response. Not to the direct demands, but as a vague grievances attributed to the public. "Not like this, obviously, but clearly we should do something about immigration."

My mother should have been in danger because of this?

Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
what

To clarify: I'm being a cynical dope by saying that sometimes, the killers get their way in a roundabout way.

Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
I caught that, but couldn't see the connection to what I had posted.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
I caught that, but couldn't see the connection to what I had posted.

You are right. I’m sorry, I didn’t want to sound accusatory. I disagree with you a lot but I feel you are good people. All of this just makes me so fucking sad.

Great Rumbler

  • Dab on the sinners
  • Global Moderator
dog

Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
Stro, what is your new white nationalist friend GAF-mate saying now?


Rufus

  • 🙈🙉🙊
  • Senior Member
I caught that, but couldn't see the connection to what I had posted.

You are right. I’m sorry, I didn’t want to sound accusatory. I disagree with you a lot but I feel you are good people. All of this just makes me so fucking sad.
It's all good, man.

I caught that, but couldn't see the connection to what I had posted.

More the sensitivity thing. Which since bored is a reasonable guy he apologized for jumping to conclusions right away.

I get and agree with your point, just saying that someone might take it the wrong way when it's a bit too real for them in that moment.
Makes sense. I have trouble reigning in my misanthropy sometimes...  Sorry, Boredfrom.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
"Maybe we don't want infants to get shot while we're shopping" seems like an easy thing to get behind much like: "hey we'd rather not have our kids die at school" regardless of your political positions.
The US bombed a Syrian airfield because 'beautiful babies were dying'. Yet, doesn't do anything when kids get shot on their own soil.
:yeshrug

 

🤴

Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member
It's not Trump's bullshit sadly, it's your country's. Too much money to be made, too much apathy. Trust me, soon it'll be back to business as usual, and then someday in the future it'll be three massacres on the same day.


Transhuman

  • youtu.be/KCVCmGPgJS0
  • Senior Member

agrajag

  • Senior Member
if his lying earns him a visit from the FBI, then that's great

Mandark

  • Icon
re: the "mental health" tangent from earlier*

If we put responsibility for preventing these shootings on the mental health system, that wouldn't just be about more resources, access, a "holistic" approach, etc. It would be about making the system a lot more invasive, giving MH professionals broad leeway to institutionalize people against their will and strong incentives to do so. Any therapist will tell you how useless the exercise is for patients who aren't open to it at the time, and lots of patients can attest to how hard it is to get someone to listen to you when you've been committed and feel you're okay to leave.

There would be a lot of people basically being incarcerated in an effort to use mental health as a sort of Minority Report lite surveillance program, and a whole infrastructure built up to support it with no guarantee of results.



spoiler (click to show/hide)
*I'll read Settlers before I read the last couple pages of this thread
[close]

ToxicAdam

  • captain of my capsized ship
  • Senior Member
There's a huge gulf between providing free mental health care (and aggressively promoting it) to people of that age and having them institutionalized.

In fact, that shouldn't even be an option. It would undermine people from seeking help in the first place if that were a potential outcome.




Madrun Badrun

  • twin-anused mascot
  • Senior Member
I mean you are right in spirit but I doubt that will happen in practice, which I think was his point - that while it might prevent some of this, it wouldn't prevent a lot of it without powers to institutionalize and the result of framing this issue as one about mental illness will result in a system of forced institutionalization. 

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
re: the "mental health" tangent from earlier*

If we put responsibility for preventing these shootings on the mental health system, that wouldn't just be about more resources, access, a "holistic" approach, etc. It would be about making the system a lot more invasive, giving MH professionals broad leeway to institutionalize people against their will and strong incentives to do so. Any therapist will tell you how useless the exercise is for patients who aren't open to it at the time, and lots of patients can attest to how hard it is to get someone to listen to you when you've been committed and feel you're okay to leave.

There would be a lot of people basically being incarcerated in an effort to use mental health as a sort of Minority Report lite surveillance program, and a whole infrastructure built up to support it with no guarantee of results.



spoiler (click to show/hide)
*I'll read Settlers before I read the last couple pages of this thread
[close]

I’m sorry, but this sound dangerous close to this:

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1836949580/amp

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Yup, males age 20 - 30 with mental conditions would just be locked up to protect the rest of society.
Not much different from the 'super predators' or the kids carrying a bit of weed of the past.

That and wholesale internet and media censorship is the direction this is headed.
🤴

Mandark

  • Icon
There's a huge gulf between providing free mental health care (and aggressively promoting it) to people of that age and having them institutionalized.

In fact, that shouldn't even be an option. It would undermine people from seeking help in the first place if that were a potential outcome.

It's already a potential outcome! Look it up in your state code.

Boredfrom

  • Senior Member
Yup, males age 20 - 30 with mental conditions would just be locked up to protect the rest of society.
Not much different from the 'super predators' or the kids carrying a bit of weed of the past.

That and wholesale internet and media censorship is the direction this is headed.

https://www.theonion.com/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-r-1836949580/amp