Started By
Message
re: FBI still can't find motive in Vegas Shooting report says
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:33 am to KSGamecock
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:33 am to KSGamecock
The division we have leads to people thinking in terms of us-them. People want stuff changed (albeit in differing ways) and when government doesn't answer they want a change to that as well.
I did watch the clip and its very odd to hear someone begging for people to stick with what we have
I did watch the clip and its very odd to hear someone begging for people to stick with what we have
1
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:35 am to momentoftruth87
quote:
The bill was introduced by Didech in concert with House Bill 887, which seeks to close a loophole which allows convicted stalkers to come to Illinois to purchase a gun.
Funny how they don't specify that the search of social media would be for stalker related posts and history specifically. No doubt though if this is passed Indiana will be blamed for violence in Chicago due to our laxer gun laws, happens too much I think.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 12:36 am
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:37 am to thatguy45
quote:
when government doesn't answer they want a change to that as well.
Yep, but what could ever replace mass representative democracy?
Personally I lean toward a kind of non-economic syndicalism in a loose confederacy...like how the country was supposed to be at one point.
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 12:40 am
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:40 am to KSGamecock
Well if society collapsed almost guaranteed monarchy would return, or at least some form of it, as that is the go to.
Theres other forms of course, and depending on who won the hypothetical civil war youd get a different one like a different prize from a cereal box. But monarchy is always a solid bet
I could see a confederation of separate economic states. The question is can a non centralized government like that hold a nation together?
Theres other forms of course, and depending on who won the hypothetical civil war youd get a different one like a different prize from a cereal box. But monarchy is always a solid bet
I could see a confederation of separate economic states. The question is can a non centralized government like that hold a nation together?
This post was edited on 1/30/19 at 12:42 am
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:51 am to thatguy45
Monarchies might sprout up in a few places, probably elective non-hereditary ones. Other places would become republics. I don’t know if it could work, it didn’t work for us at first because you run in to problems with taxation and defense...other places sort of make it work like the UAE or how the Holy Roman Empire was for a while, those aren’t exactly great examples though. I don’t know. I’m just frustrated with the slow, non-responsive, winner-take-all, big umbrella federal rules apply to everyone set up we have today. I think everyone is.
You can unite people for awhile under it, sell them a shared patriotic vision and tell them that their differences don’t matter but that only works for so long. As long as you can keep the economy stable. Once things tip a little all those forgotten differences rear their heads up again eg. Yugoslavia. We aren’t at that level but the rural urban divide in this country is very real and grows deeper everyday. People are sick of living in the same polity. If we could at least break things up a little and empower the states a bit more it would do wonders in healing things.
You can unite people for awhile under it, sell them a shared patriotic vision and tell them that their differences don’t matter but that only works for so long. As long as you can keep the economy stable. Once things tip a little all those forgotten differences rear their heads up again eg. Yugoslavia. We aren’t at that level but the rural urban divide in this country is very real and grows deeper everyday. People are sick of living in the same polity. If we could at least break things up a little and empower the states a bit more it would do wonders in healing things.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 12:55 am to thatguy45
Are you a monarchist?
Posted on 1/30/19 at 1:04 am to KSGamecock
No. The idea of one person getting to make decisions for everyone else seems like a bad idea. Occasionally youll have a good king but most of the time you've got a tard lacking a wrangler on your hands.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 1:05 am to KSGamecock
quote:
People are sick of living in the same polity. If we could at least break things up a little and empower the states a bit more it would do wonders in healing things.
No one likes being told what to do, especially by someone they didn't pick
Posted on 1/30/19 at 1:06 am to thatguy45
Yea history has defiinitely shown that.
80s style Soviet Technocracy without the Command Economy might be interesting. Wouldn’t want to live in it but I’d like to watch.
80s style Soviet Technocracy without the Command Economy might be interesting. Wouldn’t want to live in it but I’d like to watch.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 1:08 am to thatguy45
That’s the crux of the issue. Make a giant overpowered Federal government and half of the country is always going to be pissed.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 1:14 am to KSGamecock
quote:
Make a giant overpowered Federal government and half of the country is always going to be pissed.
Which is why we have a giant federal government. Without it jim bob gets his buddies together and makes his own. You cant have that if you want to hold a nation together and become increasingly powerful.
Doesn't lead to a happy populace though, just a house of cards
Posted on 1/30/19 at 7:26 am to KSGamecock
I would actually be more comfortable with a vast conspiracy to stage a mass shooting at a concert to promote a secret agenda of increasing milk sales, protesting that Billie Piper started using body doubles for her nude scenes, or whatever the cause of the week is for the conspiracy nuts then we live in a world where someone can decide to kill a ton of people for giggles.
Unfortunately we live in a world where someone can decide to kill a ton of people for giggles. A conspiracy to promote some hidden agenda... OK, we can understand that, it makes sense in a twisted way. Joe Blow deciding that since his life is spiraling out of control he might as well take a few people with him doesn't make sense.
Sadly a lot of mass killings have, at best, a thinly veiled excuse for why it happened beyond the guy did it because he could. As the Richard Pryor joke went. "Why did you kill those people?" "Well, they was home."
Unfortunately we live in a world where someone can decide to kill a ton of people for giggles. A conspiracy to promote some hidden agenda... OK, we can understand that, it makes sense in a twisted way. Joe Blow deciding that since his life is spiraling out of control he might as well take a few people with him doesn't make sense.
Sadly a lot of mass killings have, at best, a thinly veiled excuse for why it happened beyond the guy did it because he could. As the Richard Pryor joke went. "Why did you kill those people?" "Well, they was home."
Posted on 1/30/19 at 7:47 am to KSGamecock
I'll try and do the FBIs job real quick for them.
1. The top 4 floors of the Mandalay Bay are owned by the Saudi Royal Family.
2. Paddock, we are led to believe, carried a small armory's worth of weapons passed one of the more sophisticated security systems in the entire world without a hitch (this suggests he was allowed to be there for a specific reason)
3. Shortly after the event the Saudi line of succession to the crown was shifted and at least one Royal type wound up in jail.
4. The Mandalay Bay buts up next to the airport there in Vegas and the nearest hangar to where all the shooting happened is owned by the US Federal Government.
5. Many people have reported multiple shooters. Many people who claimed this and claimed to be eye witnesses also died in mysterious circumstances after the fact.
6. Some people reported that the crowd was being fired upon by either helicopters or drones.
Seems obvious enough to me what happened. Paddock, most likely, never even fired a shot. I think there was an assassination attempt and the shooting was a distraction. Paddock was an arms dealer. I would assume someone sat up a meeting with him to buy weapons (allowing him access to building bypassing sophisticated security system), shot him dead, had their assassination plot foiled, and opened fire on the crowd as cover to get whoever was trying to kill the royals out without being caught.
1. The top 4 floors of the Mandalay Bay are owned by the Saudi Royal Family.
2. Paddock, we are led to believe, carried a small armory's worth of weapons passed one of the more sophisticated security systems in the entire world without a hitch (this suggests he was allowed to be there for a specific reason)
3. Shortly after the event the Saudi line of succession to the crown was shifted and at least one Royal type wound up in jail.
4. The Mandalay Bay buts up next to the airport there in Vegas and the nearest hangar to where all the shooting happened is owned by the US Federal Government.
5. Many people have reported multiple shooters. Many people who claimed this and claimed to be eye witnesses also died in mysterious circumstances after the fact.
6. Some people reported that the crowd was being fired upon by either helicopters or drones.
Seems obvious enough to me what happened. Paddock, most likely, never even fired a shot. I think there was an assassination attempt and the shooting was a distraction. Paddock was an arms dealer. I would assume someone sat up a meeting with him to buy weapons (allowing him access to building bypassing sophisticated security system), shot him dead, had their assassination plot foiled, and opened fire on the crowd as cover to get whoever was trying to kill the royals out without being caught.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 7:58 am to BoarEd
quote:
I'll try and do the FBIs job real quick for them.
You left out the Reptilians. I'm going to have a deduct a point on this one.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 8:01 am to Arksulli
Wait. What?
Are you suggesting that assassinations don't happen or something?
Are you suggesting that assassinations don't happen or something?
Posted on 1/30/19 at 9:16 am to BoarEd
Not only does the Saudi Royal Family own the top 4 floors of the Mandalay, but the Saudi Air Force had also booked an entire hotel just down the street for the same time period.
LINK /
But sure, this is all a crazy conspiracy theory. Just like how all the 9-11 hijackers were Saudis, but despite that we needed to invade Afghanistan and Iraq while we provided safe passage for the Saudis out of the country after the attacks.
LINK /
But sure, this is all a crazy conspiracy theory. Just like how all the 9-11 hijackers were Saudis, but despite that we needed to invade Afghanistan and Iraq while we provided safe passage for the Saudis out of the country after the attacks.
Posted on 1/30/19 at 7:30 pm to BoarEd
But the Saudi line of succession didn’t change after the shooting, it changed before...and the airport is across the road from the casino/hotel with the festival grounds in between, not directly adjoining.
Lots of holes in your theories.
Lots of holes in your theories.
Posted on 2/11/19 at 12:52 pm to KSGamecock
definately reading this later
Posted on 2/11/19 at 8:18 pm to Harry Rex Vonner
swear I'm going to read this later
Page 3 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News