Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
Nah, but I've seen some pretty crass stuff in the SA thread on it, so I think I have an idea.
I made a Kaddafi joke once, when the whole Libya mess was still going on.
Good on you buddy.
I was kind of an asshole back then.
I just realized Aurora is about three hours from where I'm staying, and given my dad's love of backwoods roads, we might be driving through it on the way back home tomorrow.
The guy who hosts IJBM's servers wants me to pass this link along:
http://redditnewsreports.blogspot.com/2012/07/aurora-shooting-timeline.html
Do you have any idea how profoundly unfunny you're being right now?
This is like, the opposite of humor. The polar opposite. If Dave Chapelle was standing in the same room as you when you said this, he'd turn into an accountant.
I love how for some goddamn reason it's perfectly acceptable to make jokes about tragedies the day after they happen now, and everyone expects a chuckle at their dark and edgy humor. You're not funny. Stop trying to be.
^as taxtless as his statement was, I think he's been chewed out enough.
tactless
Eh, I have mixed feelings on that tactic. To quote Icalasari "some of us make bad jokes to help distance ourselves from crap like this." And I can understand that, when they are somebody directly involved with this tragedy. Like knowing somebody at the theater, being with the police assigned to investigate this, hospital workers dealing with the fallout or being one of the victims or their families.
But random folks on the internet? They already have enough emotional distance from such an event and don't need pitch dark humor as a coping mechanism for this.
This brand of humour depends on taboo for impact: the fresher the tragedy, the more impact it has, and then it's still too often too tacky in its execution. No-one can dictate what can and can't be made light of, but it's silly to not consider the (virtual) company you make those jokes in. You go to a chan to get that sort of thing out of your system.
As an example, well, I said in this very thread that I was having issues shaking the paranoia that my girlfriend or best friend having gone to that showing, despite my girlfriend living on the side of Utah farthest from Colorado and my friend living multiple states away
It helps to make the event feel unreal and as if it hasn't happened
At the same time, yeah, mind who you say them to (this forum isn't the best place for that, for example)
It's not wrong to feel upset in the wake of a tragedy, you know.
Even if you didn't know the people personally.
I feel myself fully capable of shedding tears over the abstract concept of lives cut short. I'm not saying it should take up your entire day, or whatever. But I don't think you need to make an active attempt to not feel anything about it, if anything, that just encourages apathy.
I was being serious. I thought that a possible reason that the dude went with Batman was because he had to find a way to get tear gas. I hadn't known prior to reading All Nine's post (which I should've read before posting) that the guy dyed his hair red and thought himself to be the Joker. I guess that I could've put a period at the end of the sentence to make it seem less sarcastic. I really am sorry, though. I shouldn't have said that
Yeah, I sort of noticed that you posted almost the exact same thing as I did on the previous page (which isn't what you're actually referring to, it turns out, and it was only from the NYPD police chief, so it might just be crap). But I didn't want to count out the possibility you were being serious. But I can sort of see how people might have had that idea, since you posted it as a one-liner.
Could be the difference in the way we phrased it. This is a portion of what I posted:
And in hindsight, I think I might have phrased that a little callously (if so, I apologize, too).
No worries, dude.
^Ah.
Well, I feel like a jerk now. In retrospect, having just come off of a ton of other people making jokes about it I guess I just assumed.
Sorry.
This whole situation is... really, there are no words.
I get this weird, awful feeling that the USA is slowly turning into what Italy was like in the '70s and '80s, but with all the positive aspects (the "occupation" of Bologna, Radio Alice) excised in favour of more senseless bloodshed.
Just curious what do you mean by 70's and 80s Italy?
-I know next to nothing about Italy in general-
^^Violent crime in the US has been consistently dropping for over 20 years. You just hear about it more because news shows need something to fill time.
Depends on your area. Overall it's been dropping, but you've also been getting a wider spread of what's there. Smaller towns have been getting more pervasive drug problems for instance, and all the associated gang activity.
Well, yeah, but the premise that America is heading toward an age of senseless bloodshed is demonstrably false.
Incidentally, on the subject of gun control, my dad made the interesting point that the "assault rifle" (in actuality a civilian model with no full-auto) he mostly used was probably his least lethal weapon, since the ammunition for those has to qualify with the Geneva conventions, and is thus much less lethal than whatever was in the faster-firing pistol he only switched to later.
Which is not to say that some thoughtful gun/weapon legislation wouldn't be a good thing (most gun legislation today has the severe problem of being written by people who don't know much about guns). For example, he definitely should not have had tear gas. And maybe a background check a little more thorough than checking if the buyer is already a violent criminal would be nice. Maybe even a brief psychological evaluation. Maybe also something like needing to pass a hunting class before buying anything but a pistol.
I'm definitely up for safety courses before they let you have a license.
Thing is, I seriously doubt any amount of regulation would have caught this guy. If he had access to tear gas and motherfucking riot gear, chances are even an outright ban wouldn't have stopped him from getting his stuff on the down-low.
I'm pretty cold on gun ownership in general, but whichever way someone goes, I think it's pretty clear that civilians should not own military hardware. A pistol is small enough to be convenient enough for self defense, god forbid you ever need one, but for what reason would anyone need an assault rifle? Even if the pistol ammo was technically more deadly (which is conjecture), an assault rifle is not able to be carried conveniently during one's normal day and certainly not a hunting tool.
Tear gas is right the fuck out of the ballpark, of course. That's an assault and control tool, not meaningfully able to be used in any case of private self defense.
Good point. While lethality might not be a reason to ban the civilian version of that model, the fact that any civilian who thinks he needs one is either crazy or knows nothing about guns is a good one.
That's actually the exact reason they should be more legal than pistols. Most gun murders are not mass shootings like this: most shootings require some kind of concealment of the weapon beforehand. Therefore, weapons that are easy to conceal are MUCH more dangerous from a public safety point of view than weapons that are essentially impossible to conceal but might do more damage if you manage to actually shoot it.
Yo might have heard of the Red Brigades. Or perhaps the Bologna massacre.
As for senseless bloodshed, I should perhaps have been more clear that I was referring to the rise of things like violent right-wing extremism than crime in general. Most of the domestic terrorism plots in the United States have been fairly unsuccessful, but they have skyrocketed lately, and it is only a matter of time before one of these psychos pulls something like this off successfully. At least one has, on a small scale—the shooting of Gabrielle Giffords—but there have been a number of other worrying incidents in which madmen have unsuccessfully attempted to kill large numbers of people, and I think that it is only a matter of time before they succeed.
Maybe I shouldn't have said anything here about that, as it has very little to do with this recent event, but whenever I see violence like this perpetrated, I wonder: What will come next? If a certifiably insane man can purchase firearms so easily, what about a neo-Nazi? It really disturbs me.
Well, we at least shouldn't be imposing more stringent qualification rules on civilians than we should on law enforcement. And..well...about that.
So Christian Bale actually did visit victims. For what it's worth, he went as himself, and not Batman.