Sandyhook still unanswered Questions

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
This thread's about Sandy Hook. The guy was suicidal. As is near every white mass shooter. Thank God these shootings have seemed to settle down recently. I wonder if people are more actively separating known suicidal people in their lives from guns now.

Adam Lanza had severe mental health problems. Granted, those who commit these horrendous massacres have severe mental issues but all the more reason to have stringent background checks before people can legally purchase firearms.
 

Idolater

Popetard
Temp Banned
Adam Lanza had severe mental health problems. Granted, those who commit these horrendous massacres have severe mental issues but all the more reason to have stringent background checks before people can legally purchase firearms.

I don't understand. He had a specific mental health problem, suicidality, but you are wanting to widen it out to mental health problems generally for some reason that you haven't set out, and then say or imply, that anybody with mental health problems should be kept away from guns. But no, just one very specific and particular mental problem coordinates and correlates with white mass shootings. Suicidality.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I don't understand. He had a specific mental health problem, suicidality, but you are wanting to widen it out to mental health problems generally for some reason that you haven't set out, and then say or imply, that anybody with mental health problems should be kept away from guns. But no, just one very specific and particular mental problem coordinates and correlates with white mass shootings. Suicidality.

He had multiple neurological conditions documented from early childhood. You talk about suicidality as though it's glaringly obvious to spot - it often isn't. Many people have killed themselves and their loved ones had little to no idea that anything was wrong. Yes, people with mental health problems should not have legal access to firearms.
 

Derf

Well-known member
Ask Jones, he made the unsupportable claims.





You should know fine well that it wasn't by now
Just like we knew 11 years after JFK was killed exactly who did it and why. Right.
and Jones deserved what he got, Heck, a few years ago I listened to a couple of infowars broadcasts and they were hysterical.
And therefore he deserves to be silenced? Hear that TOL Moderators? Arthur Brain just justified his own banning!
Only the most gullible would buy anything the guy spouts and the adverts were clearly designed at conspiracy cranks.
And therefore he needs to be silenced? Your reasoning is seriously flawed. If only the most gullible would believe it, then it is hardly cause for silencing
Hmm, we're really not cos I'm on the side of reality.
See how hysterical you can be?
Some of us saw events unfold in real time and it was obvious who was involved both at the time and now. Hint - it was Trump supporters...
Just like the Whitmer kidnapping plot. Got it.
I knew people that were there. They are in their 80's and in no way were trying to do or instigate violence. I almost went, myself, but thought it would be horrible traffic.

Your Guardian article mentions a small number of people that died, as if it was the rioters that killed them, but nobody on the defender's side died that day. It mentioned that police officer committed suicide, but didn't mention the imprisoned that have committed suicide. Your source is obviously biased. Hysterically so.

But I don't think they should be silenced.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
Just like we knew 11 years after JFK was killed exactly who did it and why. Right.

What's your point?

And therefore he deserves to be silenced? Hear that TOL Moderators? Arthur Brain just justified his own banning!

Where did I say he deserved to be silenced? He deserved to pay a lot in reparations to the families after causing such pain and misery for sure.

And therefore he needs to be silenced? Your reasoning is seriously flawed. If only the most gullible would believe it, then it is hardly cause for silencing

He wasn't silenced, he's still been active since. Let me clue you in here. I have zero interest in silencing people, no matter how bat crazy, whacked out, loop the loop etc they might happen to be. I'm not for censoring folk and never have been, I prefer views - including the loony ones - to be aired so you might wanna quit with this cos you'll just be flogging a dead horse.

See how hysterical you can be?

Accepting the reality of an event is hysterical to you?

Just like the Whitmer kidnapping plot. Got it.

Man, you have to be a real conspiracy nut to try and make out this was anything other than what was so flaming obvious. Trump supporters stormed the capitol, end of. Have you even seen the footage that's readily available of that day? I saw it live.

I knew people that were there. They are in their 80's and in no way were trying to do or instigate violence. I almost went, myself, but thought it would be horrible traffic.

Your Guardian article mentions a small number of people that died, as if it was the rioters that killed them, but nobody on the defender's side died that day. It mentioned that police officer committed suicide, but didn't mention the imprisoned that have committed suicide. Your source is obviously biased. Hysterically so.

But I don't think they should be silenced.

Not everybody who was there that day participated in the attack and nobody is claiming otherwise. It was hardly just the Guardian that reported on events that day, I could have used multiple journalistic sources that would say the same so your accusation of bias is a joke. Hey, if you wanna believe that it was some conspiracy then knock yourself out. Again, I said with reality on the score, not half baked tin foil hat rubbish.
 

Derf

Well-known member
What's your point?
You are assuming we know everything about Sandy Hook, but there are many events from older times we don't know everything about. Some we find out more about as time goes on. Some fade to obscurity without full understanding.
Where did I say he deserved to be silenced? He deserved to pay a lot in reparations to the families after causing such pain and misery for sure.
You said he deserved what he got. Part of that was the loss of his platform. How much do you deserve when you call people names or say they are loopy? Isn't that what he was doing, saying the people involved didn't understand what really happened? Where is your decency?
He wasn't silenced, he's still been active since.
You can still be "active" even when banned on TOL. But you are silenced in this venue.
Let me clue you in here. I have zero interest in silencing people, no matter how bat crazy, whacked out, loop the loop etc they might happen to be. I'm not for censoring folk and never have been, I prefer views - including the loony ones - to be aired so you might wanna quit with this cos you'll just be flogging a dead horse.



Accepting the reality of an event is hysterical to you?
Positing alternate explanations is hysterical to you?
Man, you have to be a real conspiracy nut to try and make out this was anything other than what was so flaming obvious. Trump supporters stormed the capitol, end of. Have you even seen the footage that's readily available of that day? I saw it live.
Congratulations
Not everybody who was there that day participated in the attack and nobody is claiming otherwise. It was hardly just the Guardian that reported on events that day, I could have used multiple journalistic sources that would say the same so your accusation of bias is a joke. Hey, if you wanna believe that it was some conspiracy then knock yourself out. Again, I said with reality on the score, not half baked tin foil hat rubbish.
Which is another way of silencing people, calling them tin-foil-hatters, or conspiracy theorists or that they believe rubbish. I thought you said you didn't want to silence people.
 

Idolater

Popetard
Temp Banned
Implied Profanity is not allowed.
He had multiple neurological conditions documented from early childhood. You talk about suicidality as though it's glaringly obvious to spot - it often isn't. Many people have killed themselves and their loved ones had little to no idea that anything was wrong. Yes, people with mental health problems should not have legal access to firearms.

If what you mean then (since there are a number of mental health problems which statistically correlate with suicidality, and they all relate to a failure to regulate your thoughts and feelings), is that people who fail to regulate their thoughts and feelings should be kept away from guns, we might actually be near a meeting of the minds Arthur. That doesn't sound too bad to me. It's going to be a [redacted] to pull off re justice (for example, in a way that isn't easily abused, or arbitrary), but if this is your principle, and if by it you mean, so long as you are a person who regulates your thoughts and feelings, then by all means, have all the guns you want, then we're probably within sight of the finish line between me and you re guns and gun control.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
You are assuming we know everything about Sandy Hook, but there are many events from older times we don't know everything about. Some we find out more about as time goes on. Some fade to obscurity without full understanding.

We know enough to know that it happened and was real, that on Dec 14th 2012, Adam Lanza went to Sandy Hook Elementary High school and shot and killed 26 people, 6 adult staff and 20 children aged between six and seven. Even Jones finally acknowledged this much, under oath in court when confronted with unassailable evidence. So what's anyone else's excuse for perpetuating asinine conspiracy theories on the score?

You said he deserved what he got. Part of that was the loss of his platform. How much do you deserve when you call people names or say they are loopy? Isn't that what he was doing, saying the people involved didn't understand what really happened? Where is your decency?

Yes, he did and he only had himself to blame. He promoted unsupportable conspiracy tropes that not only compounded the unimaginable grief the parents and loved ones were enduring, they had ten years of hassle and abuse from his followers to contend with on top of that - including death threats, accusations of fraud, demands to see their dead children's birth certificates and even demands for their bodies to be exhumed. Can you imagine what that would be like for the parents? How awful it must have been?

So, Jones probably thought he'd get away with it without many repercussions except he didn't count on getting as much pushback as he did. He even taunted the jury telling them "Come on, crucify me" - which in a sense they obligingly did. He put his own platform at risk and paid the price but nobody was out to silence him.

I don't go around calling people names on this site, I never have particularly, even twenty years ago when I first joined although I was guilty on occasion and got banned for it which was fair enough. In turn I've been called a faggot, spawn of Satan and all sorts and I just laugh it off. If someone promotes crackpot conspiracies then I'm gonna call em' on it and consistently have done. So?

You ask me where my decency is. Well, for starters I wouldn't dream of concocting rubbish that would add to the grief of anyone bereaved so my sympathies lie with the victims and loved ones of Sandy Hook, not with a conniving, snake oil selling con artist who plies his trade off the misery and suffering of other people and grifts money off the gullible in doing so. So, I'll ask you the same question - where's your decency? Cos if you imply doubt that Sandy Hook was a real massacre then you're in no position to lecture about it.

You can still be "active" even when banned on TOL. But you are silenced in this venue.

Yeah, I know how it works thanks and Jones still found ways to be heard.

Positing alternate explanations is hysterical to you?

Not hysterical necessarily but they're bizarre when the truth of an issue is so transparently obvious.

Congratulations

None needed, it was sickening to watch.

Which is another way of silencing people, calling them tin-foil-hatters, or conspiracy theorists or that they believe rubbish. I thought you said you didn't want to silence people.

Of course it isn't else who is trying to silence you? It sure ain't me so ya really wanna drop that angle cos you're on a hiding to nowhere with it. Heck, I was never one to trouble the mods with frivolous reports, in fact I can't even remember the last time I reported someone on here so move on already.
 
Last edited:

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
If what you mean then (since there are a number of mental health problems which statistically correlate with suicidality, and they all relate to a failure to regulate your thoughts and feelings), is that people who fail to regulate their thoughts and feelings should be kept away from guns, we might actually be near a meeting of the minds Arthur. That doesn't sound too bad to me. It's going to be a [redacted] to pull off re justice (for example, in a way that isn't easily abused, or arbitrary), but if this is your principle, and if by it you mean, so long as you are a person who regulates your thoughts and feelings, then by all means, have all the guns you want, then we're probably within sight of the finish line between me and you re guns and gun control.

Partly although not totally. You're focusing on suicide as though that's the big thing and I disagree. For starters, anyone can feel suicidal at certain points under the *right* circumstances, and most people who entertain taking their own life aren't homicidal either. Yes, anyone feeling suicidal should not have legal access to firearms but again, it's not like it's always easy to spot. You can't look at a crowd of people and think 'spot the suicidal one'. Many other things should rule people out from owning guns as well.
 
Top