Ohio shooting

[Firehaus]

You know what they say about threes.....

They're terrible.




(inappropriate time for a dad joke, I know)


I think we can drop the repeat conspiratory rhetoric, can't we? Unless we're trying to get our entertainment from Irving.

As with any other ill founded realm of tin foil, ask yourself: How much human resources would it take to undertake such a thing, and how much risk would they be exposed to by doing it?

Remember, two people or more working on something and you're guaranteed some millennial's going to blab about it on twitter. The risk they would be exposed to would be the total, permanent loss of their platform. Nope, it's not a conspiracy.

Is this cognitive dissonance or what you tell yourself so you can sleep better at night?

There?s wearing the tinfoil hat to keep them from reading your thoughts, and there is wearing the tinfoil to keep out anything that causes cognitive dissonance.

Have you ever researched when the term ?conspiracy theory? became widely used in the english language?

How many people work at the military, fbi, cia, nsa, etcetera without leaking classified info?

What are the odds of being in one mass shooting event, let alone people being present in multiple mass shooting events in different states? Or even in the same city at the same time of an event to be interviewed about it?

Shooters in therapy / on psychotropic drugs?

Ever pay attention to what else is going on in the news cycle politically that they might want to distract from?

There?s more to some of these events than just coincidence.


Good & Evil are real.









Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BushMasterBoy]

Facebook and Instagram are reporting extreme outages of processing ability.

[Eric P]

Facebook and Instagram are reporting extreme outages of processing ability.

I'm surprised by the overwhelming anti-gun control comments on the local news channel's pages on these stories. Anti gunners are being attacked with logic.

Maybe because FB is for old out of touch white men now?

[FoxtArt]

How many people work at the military, fbi, cia, nsa, etcetera without leaking classified info?

What are the odds of being in one mass shooting event, let alone people being present in multiple mass shooting events in different states? Or even in the same city at the same time of an event to be interviewed about it?

Shooters in therapy / on psychotropic drugs?

Ever pay attention to what else is going on in the news cycle politically that they might want to distract from?

There?s more to some of these events than just coincidence.


Good & Evil are real.

You know those times when you don't want to say something out loud because you know it sounds insane and its not grounded in any logic at all, but you just "feel" like it's correct? And then you say it out loud?

First, select aspects of my response is obviously tongue in cheek, such as one out of two. If there is any connection, it will come out. It's almost impossible for the average "citizen" to go dark online. They don't have the skills. The mathematical chance of there being any connection is ever so slightly above zero. Every time you guys come out of the wood works swearing its a conspiracy, just as the left comes out of the wood works swearing its about guns. The ratio of both sides being correct is about 0%, thus far. And no, even on the national level, we don't keep secrets terribly well. Some individuals do. Some don't. Example A: Congress. Most of the ones that do leak it obviously don't run to the press, they share something with someone close to them. It's still a leak. It just doesn't "escape". The difference is, when stabby McStab Stanley leaks something to someone else, and he goes and stabby stabs a bunch of people, those people are pretty motivated to share information. Via one method or another.

And on the level of millennial aged angst shooters? Yeah, sure, a whole group of them can totally maintain better secure comms than the US Gov' and resist investigative manipulation better than our trained agents without any education or personal experience. Those skills just pop out of nowhere. Can you people hear yourselves?

As far as your chances, 12.7% of the US population took SSRI's in the last month, by example. If we take a mass shootings at a large music festival..say like the one in Las Vegas with 22,000 people in attendance, that is 1:14,363 American's that was "at" that single mass shooting. If there was only one other shooting in the history of our country, and it was also a music festival; on average between one to two people would have been at the prior "mass shooting". In reality, because people who like things tend to do those things more often than other people who don't like those things, you'd probably see 10-15+ people from the prior "mass shooting" at another "mass shooting" of a music festival that size. I'm not going to spend my life debunking the rest of your mathematical assertion because it's not grounded in any logic. Between hundreds to many thousands of people "are part", e.g. witness each shooting, so yes, several of them will statistically be involved in others.

Some people have also survived two helicopter crashes in under 24 hours. But yet, your odds of your helicopter crashing are phenomenally low. CONSPIRACY

[FoxtArt]

Good & Evil are real.

It's ironic that almost every mass killer thinks they are "good" in their minds eye. Each side of a war generally thinks they are the "good" guys.

Maybe "Good" and "Evil" are just concepts, hmm?

Personality disorders are real.
Empathy is real.
Kindness is real.
Murder is real.

"Good" and "Evil" are not "real", they are mere concepts in the eye of the individual beholder and the judge; to which segments of society often roughly agree on what constitutes "good" and "bad".

[MrAK]

You know those times when you don't want to say something out loud because you know it sounds insane and its not grounded in any logic at all, but you just "feel" like it's correct? And then you say it out loud?

First, select aspects of my response is obviously tongue in cheek, such as one out of two. If there is any connection, it will come out. It's almost impossible for the average "citizen" to go dark online. They don't have the skills. The mathematical chance of there being any connection is ever so slightly above zero. Every time you guys come out of the wood works swearing its a conspiracy, just as the left comes out of the wood works swearing its about guns. The ratio of both sides being correct is about 0%, thus far. And no, even on the national level, we don't keep secrets terribly well. Some individuals do. Some don't. Example A: Congress. Most of the ones that do leak it obviously don't run to the press, they share something with someone close to them. It's still a leak. It just doesn't "escape". The difference is, when stabby McStab Stanley leaks something to someone else, and he goes and stabby stabs a bunch of people, those people are pretty motivated to share information. Via one method or another.

And on the level of millennial aged angst shooters? Yeah, sure, a whole group of them can totally maintain better secure comms than the US Gov' and resist investigative manipulation better than our trained agents without any education or personal experience. Those skills just pop out of nowhere. Can you people hear yourselves?

As far as your chances, 12.7% of the US population took SSRI's in the last month, by example. If we take a mass shootings at a large music festival..say like the one in Las Vegas with 22,000 people in attendance, that is 1:14,363 American's that was "at" that single mass shooting. If there was only one other shooting in the history of our country, and it was also a music festival; on average between one to two people would have been at the prior "mass shooting". In reality, because people who like things tend to do those things more often than other people who don't like those things, you'd probably see 10-15+ people from the prior "mass shooting" at another "mass shooting" of a music festival that size. I'm not going to spend my life debuning the rest of your mathmatical assertion because it's not grounded in any logic. Between hundreds to many thousands of people "are part", e.g. witness each shooting, so yes, several of them will statistically be involved in others.

Some people have also survived two helicopter crashes in under 24 hours. But yet, your odds of your helicopter crashing are phenomenally low. CONSPIRACY

I?m old enough to remember Operation Fast and Furious. I think a lot of us knew what was up with that story as soon as it broke, or at least our guts did. That story was widely reported on, and still was swept under the rug. You?d have a hard time convincing me that some of the most public individuals in this country didn?t engage in a conspiracy to enact gun control by creating a problem of gun violence to be publicized and politicized.

[Irving]

The thing with talk about conspiracy theories is that one day, there WILL be something that fits the mold and is found out. Statistics work that way as well. All it takes is the validity of a single event to cast all others into doubt. That's all fine and well, except it isn't, because it distorts how people look at what's really happening, and distracts from ever making a real attempt at getting to the root of what is going on.

I think that we've unfortunately entered a period in history where indiscriminate shooting of the public has become a popular fad. Everyone is too busy trying to pound these events into their own special mold to use as propaganda to drive the political changes that they want, that the actual issue, and whether it can even be remedied, is being completely ignored.

Nothing, nothing , is ever black and white, so any suggestion that begins with, "It's simple, just do X and Y won't happen." Is irresponsibly lazy and an insult to the problem itself and especially those affected by it. That goes for immigration, public shootings, vaccines, NASA, climate change, etc.

[Irving]

I?m old enough to remember Operation Fast and Furious. I think a lot of us knew what was up with that story as soon as it broke, or at least our guts did. That story was widely reported on, and still was swept under the rug. You?d have a hard time convincing me that some of the most public individuals in this country didn?t engage in a conspiracy to enact gun control by creating a problem of gun violence to be publicized and politicized.

Just on face value, creating a gun problem to help a political gun control campaign by giving guns to another country seems like quite the long way around. Like selling China all our top secret coal mining Intel to influence environmental policies at home.

[MrAK]

The thing with talk about conspiracy theories is that one day, there WILL be something that fits the mold and is found out. Statistics work that way as well. All it takes is the validity of a single event to cast all others into doubt. That's all fine and well, except it isn't, because it distorts how people look at what's really happening, and distracts from ever making a real attempt at getting to the root of what is going on.

I think that we've unfortunately entered a period in history where indiscriminate shooting of the public has become a dad. Everyone is too busy trying to pound these events into their own special mold to use as propaganda to drive the political changes that they want, that the actual issue, and whether it can even be remedied, is being completely ignored.

Nothing, nothing , is ever black and white, so any suggestion that begins with, "It's simple, just do X and Y won't happen." Is irresponsibly lazy and an insult to the problem itself and especially those affected by it. That goes for immigration, public shootings, vaccines, NASA, climate change, etc.

I could apply almost all of those points to the fall out from my last romantic relationship...

[FoxtArt]

I’m old enough to remember Operation Fast and Furious. I think a lot of us knew what was up with that story as soon as it broke, or at least our guys did. That story was widely reported on, and still swept under the rug. You’d have a hard time convincing me that some of the most public individuals in this country didn’t engage in a conspiracy to enact gun control by creating a problem of gun violence to be publicized and politicized.

There is a lot of systematic corruption inside our government, as in any other. However, when considering whether or not to give a conspiracy theory any credibility, one needs to consider the human capital needed to invest into it, against the possibility of leaks, against the risk if it is leaked.

Fast & Furious involved many several law enforcement professionals under a directive to let firearms be smuggled into Mexico to try to track and take out higher levels of the smuggling operation. That is an objective that even a lot of conservative law enforcement professionals are REALLY familiar with. You let some drugs get passed around the community and don't arrest the informant on the corner, because you want the big guys. That objective could have masked a second, tertiary political motive.

Now, lets talk about some secret democrat conspiracy to brainwash young adult millennial with angst. How do they know the dudes going to go through with it? Shit, now they're going to need a suicide vest, because if he gets captured, he's not trained in investigative techniques and will tell them about Nancy Palosi's hidden underground bunker where they were in padded cells with speakers repeating "kill kill kill ar ar ar kill kill kill ar ar ar". And what is the risk if they get found out? Oh shit, the entire democratic party wouldn't survive that conspiracy!

It's also a lot harder to get people reliably behind "hey lets randomly get people and kids murdered". Funny, how that works.

Yeah. Can we stop. Use your heads. Why do I have to explain this? You people should be able to rule it out all by yourselves.
1) How much human capital would have to be invested.
2) What would be the possibility of leaks.
3) What other weaknesses would the conspiracy necessarily entail.
4) What would be the fallout if it's leaked.
5) How long could it go on before it's likely leaked.

Cognitive dissonance is believing this shit BECAUSE you want to believe it, BECAUSE it aligns with what you want to be true. Modifying your reality so you dismiss all logic and facts that disagree with your presumption. E.g. "well, people have TSC's, so clearly it's possible to have a huge conspiracy that's kept secret murdering people randomly".

Critical thinking is analyzing your initial thoughts, logically, as above.

I can't fix flawed logic any more than someone can fix a psychopath with a defective frontal cortex. So, for the people that don't get it.. sorry, not going to beat the horse anymore. And I do feel sorry for people who can't think beyond the confines of their presumptions.