Southern anger takes 8 more lives

Washington Post wrote:Suspect charged with eight counts of murder in killings at Atlanta-area spas, authorities say

By Paulina Firozi, Mark Berman, Meryl Kornfield, Timothy Bella, Keith McMillan and Hannah Knowles

March 17, 2021 at 8:45 p.m. PDT

The 21-year-old suspect in shootings at three Atlanta-area spas has been charged with eight counts of murder and homicide and one count of aggravated assault, police said Wednesday.

Robert Aaron Long was charged with four counts of murder and one count of aggravated assault in the attacks in Cherokee County, according to the sheriff’s office there. The Atlanta police said later Wednesday afternoon that he was also charged with four counts of homicide in the killings in that city.

Six Asian women died in the attacks on Tuesday, prompting widespread concern that the killings could be the latest in a surge of hate crimes against Asian Americans.

Here’s what to know:

Long told investigators that he has a “sexual addiction,” authorities say, and that the spas were “a temptation for him that he wanted to eliminate.” Police added that it was too early to be certain that the slayings were not racially motivated.

Long was reportedly on his way to Florida to carry out additional shootings, Atlanta Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms (D) said.

Police identified the four victims killed in Cherokee County and added that a fifth suffered wounds that are not life-threatening. Delaina Yaun was a well-liked Waffle House employee who relatives and friends say was killed while on a date night.

Vice President Harris called the shootings “tragic” and expressed condolences to the families of the eight people killed. President Biden also said he was “very concerned” about the shootings.

While many Democrats were quick to condemn the shooting and link it to Trump’s rhetoric, Republicans remained mostly quiet.

Asian American leaders are warning that a deepening geopolitical confrontation between the United States and China is contributing to the heightened suspicion, prejudice and violence against their communities.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/03/17/atlanta-spa-shootings-live-updates/

Washington Post wrote:“The shooter said it wasn’t racially motivated, but on the other hand, he’s going specifically to these spas where Asian women work precisely to serve the sexual fantasies of white males,” David Palumbo-Liu, a Stanford professor and author of “Asian/American: Historical Crossings of a Racial Frontier,” said in an interview.

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Yeah, guns are designed to kill. That's why they are more effective than say a feather duster, at stopping someone.

That depends on who has the duster


ps a feather duster is the first one

Korben wrote:In all this debate about arming women as a deterrent or protection against sexual assault nobody has mentioned what if the rapist/sexual assaulter is also armed ? and to be honest is likely to have his gun in his hand unlike a women

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:In all this debate about arming women as a deterrent or protection against sexual assault nobody has mentioned what if the rapist/sexual assaulter is also armed ? and to be honest is likely to have his gun in his hand unlike a women

What if he is Jackie Chan?

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

What if he is Jackie Chan?

what if's  hypothetical case or situation; conjecture: a series of what-ifs.

What if its a 4 foot tall midget or a 7 foot tall Hungarian
what if's  
Comprehensive self-defence training develops real confidence that is backed up by mental and physical capability
In the uk we are looking at this approach for girls in school designed to equip pupils for adult life and to be able to manage risk in a variety of situations

No gun required because our streets are not awash with them

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
what if's  hypothetical case or situation; conjecture: a series of what-ifs.

What if its a 4 foot tall midget or a 7 foot tall Hungarian
what if's  
Comprehensive self-defence training develops real confidence that is backed up by mental and physical capability
In the uk we are looking at this approach for girls in school designed to equip pupils for adult life and to be able to manage risk in a variety of situations

No gun required because our streets are not awash with them

What if the gun is painted pink?

Surely that's a nice gun.

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

What if the gun is painted pink?

Surely that's a nice gun.

No such thing as a nice gun MD what ever the colour
i guess now you're making jokes you concede my points .....

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
No such thing as a nice gun MD what ever the colour
i guess now you're making jokes you concede my points .....

Guns are inanimate objects and therefore emotionless.  

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Guns are inanimate objects and therefore emotionless.  

Ah!! The Guns don't kill people; people do, argument

i think you have mistaken/ignored  the relevance of proximate causation there mate

Original Quill wrote:

Korben wrote:
Ah!! The Guns don't kill people; people do, argument

i think you have mistaken/ignored  the relevance of proximate causation there mate

You already posted the reply to that one, Korben:

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Guns are inanimate objects and therefore emotionless.  

Ah!! The Guns don't kill people; people do, argument

i think you have mistaken/ignored  the relevance of proximate causation there mate

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
Ah!! The Guns don't kill people; people do, argument

i think you have mistaken/ignored  the relevance of proximate causation there mate

Are guns inanimate, yes or no?

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Are guns inanimate, yes or no?

As you have already said you don't ask a question unless you know the answer this seems a superfluous question

do you know what proximate causation is ?

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
As you have already said you don't ask a question unless you know the answer this seems a superfluous question

do you know what proximate causation is ?

Yes.  

It was part of the rationale for our failed experiment with prohibition.  Can't missuse alcohol and kill yourself or others if it's not readily available.  

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Yes.  

It was part of the rationale for our failed experiment with prohibition.  Can't missuse alcohol and kill yourself or others if it's not readily available.  

so then it follows if Guns are not readily available you cant kill your self or others

haven't you just Shot (pun intended )your argument in the foot ?

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
so then it follows if Guns are not readily available you cant kill your self or others

haven't you just Shot (pun intended )your argument in the foot ?

No. I'm comfortable with people having enough freedom to abuse those freedoms.  

I mean if it's your contention that people can be irresponsible or even evil, I'll agree.  But I don't believe in limiting the freedoms of the vast majority because of the actions of tiny minorities.  

JulesV wrote:


So, having a ''bad day'' made the shooter drive for over an hour to specific locations to shoot people?

Maddog wrote:

Korben wrote:
so then it follows if Guns are not readily available you cant kill your self or others

haven't you just Shot (pun intended )your argument in the foot ?

No. I'm comfortable with people having enough freedom to abuse those freedoms.

I mean if it's your contention that people can be irresponsible or even evil, I'll agree. But I don't believe in limiting the freedoms of the vast majority because of the actions of tiny minorities.

JulesV wrote:Been reading about this shooting and I understand things a bit better now.

My instincts that he is a Christian fundamentalist were 100% correct.

The church to which he is attached has been quickly deleting all their radical sermons cos they feel responsible.

Meantime so many folks are FURIOUS that the sheriff claimed the guy killed those women cos "he was having a bad day". (and it does not help that this dolt of a sheriff is apparently a documented bigot. )


So, having a ''bad day'' made the shooter drive for over an hour to specific locations to shoot people?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

No. I'm comfortable with people having enough freedom to abuse those freedoms.  

I mean if it's your contention that people can be irresponsible or even evil, I'll agree.  But I don't believe in limiting the freedoms of the vast majority because of the actions of tiny minorities.  

That's a legislative decision.  The answer is to weigh the harm, even if a few partake in the wrong, vs. the freedoms of others.  When a law is made, it's because—though you are comfortable with the harm—you lose.  You just have to learn to live with democracy, Red.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's a legislative decision.  The answer is to weigh the harm, even if a few partake in the wrong, vs. the freedoms of others.  When a law is made, it's because—though you are comfortable with the harm—you lose.  You just have to learn to live with democracy, Red.

I'm under no obligation to accept the decisions of majorities, even legislative ones.  I have my own code of conduct and means of deciding right from wrong and it's not based on what 51 folks out of 100 think. I'm quite comfortable having opinions shared by minorities.  

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's a legislative decision.  The answer is to weigh the harm, even if a few partake in the wrong, vs. the freedoms of others.  When a law is made, it's because—though you are comfortable with the harm—you lose.  You just have to learn to live with democracy, Red.

I'm under no obligation to accept the decisions of majorities, even legislative ones.  I have my own code of conduct and means of deciding right from wrong and it's not based on what 51 folks out of 100 think. I'm quite comfortable having opinions shared by minorities.  

Korben wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm under no obligation to accept the decisions of majorities, even legislative ones.  I have my own code of conduct and means of deciding right from wrong and it's not based on what 51 folks out of 100 think. I'm quite comfortable having opinions shared by minorities.  

So your saying you have no obligation to follow Any laws you deem unreasonable or don't mesh with your own personal code of conduct

Korben wrote:Yet more Pulling a gun as the answer to well nothing really
https://www.rawstory.com/jason-edward-rickels/

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm under no obligation to accept the decisions of majorities, even legislative ones.  I have my own code of conduct and means of deciding right from wrong and it's not based on what 51 folks out of 100 think. I'm quite comfortable having opinions shared by minorities.  

If you reject the social contract, get the fook out.  Do like Hitler, and retire to Lago Nahuel Huapi, Argentina.  Or, we can arrange a pleasant little villa in Guantanamo, Cuba.     We own property there.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

If you reject the social contract, get the fook out.  Do like Hitler, and retire to Lago Nahuel Huapi, Argentina.  Or, we can arrange a pleasant little villa in Guantanamo, Cuba.     We own property there.

Were Jim Crow laws legal in your lifetime?

The Guardian wrote:'Jim Crow in the 21st century': Biden denounces Georgia Republicans over new voting law

Joe Biden lambasted a new law in Georgia that imposes sweeping new voting restrictions, calling it “un-American” and “Jim Crow in the 21st century”.

He said in a statement: “Instead of celebrating the rights of all Georgians to vote or winning campaigns on the merits of their ideas, Republicans in the state instead rushed through an un-American law to deny people the right to vote. This law, like so many others being pursued by Republicans in statehouses across the country, is a blatant attack on the constitution and good conscience.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/26/biden-georgia-republicans-voting-rights-restrictions

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:Been reading about this shooting and I understand things a bit better now.

My instincts that he is a Christian fundamentalist were 100% correct.

The church to which he is attached has been quickly deleting all their radical sermons cos they feel responsible.

Meantime so many folks are FURIOUS that the sheriff claimed the guy killed those women cos "he was having a bad day". (and it does not help that this dolt of a sheriff is apparently a documented bigot. )


So, having a ''bad day'' made the shooter drive for over an hour to specific locations to shoot people?

The sheriff was repeating what the killer said, not drawing a conclusion.  

But much like on this forum, many folks in the US are more interested emotion than facts.

JulesV wrote:

Maddog wrote:

The sheriff was repeating what the killer said, not drawing a conclusion.  

But much like on this forum, many folks in the US are more interested emotion than facts.

It's not the sheriff's job to relay messages from the killer. Wrong messenger, wrong timing.

At the trial there will be plenty of time for the killer's lawyer to explain how "his mum did not love him, his dad was a drunk, his boss was a bully ........ plus he'd had a bad day."

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Were Jim Crow laws legal in your lifetime?

One just passed 3-days ago down in Georgia.  It restricts black voting in several different ways:

The Guardian wrote:'Jim Crow in the 21st century': Biden denounces Georgia Republicans over new voting law

Joe Biden lambasted a new law in Georgia that imposes sweeping new voting restrictions, calling it “un-American” and “Jim Crow in the 21st century”.

He said in a statement: “Instead of celebrating the rights of all Georgians to vote or winning campaigns on the merits of their ideas, Republicans in the state instead rushed through an un-American law to deny people the right to vote. This law, like so many others being pursued by Republicans in statehouses across the country, is a blatant attack on the constitution and good conscience.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/26/biden-georgia-republicans-voting-rights-restrictions

The Bill targets black neighborhoods, areas where polling places are rare, and lines are expected to be long, by making it difficult to impossible for voters to stay and vote.  Jim Crow laws always restrict black voting.  That’s the point.

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:

It's not the sheriff's job to relay messages from the killer. Wrong messenger, wrong timing.

At the trial there will be plenty of time for the killer's lawyer to explain how "his mum did not love him, his dad was a drunk, his boss was a bully ........ plus he'd had a bad day."

It was a news conference.  The sheriff was asked if the killer gave any indication why he did it.  The sheriff was relaying information. Why have a news conference if you're not going to do that?

JulesV wrote:@ Quill,  was it this sheriff's deputy who was sacked last September? - it's an interesting story which started with an accusation of a BROKEN rear tail light (yes that old chestnut lol) ..... and ended up with BROKEN bones.  
Take a look when you have time, Quill, fascinating!  >>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te2IIsVeJGY

JulesV wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It was a news conference.  The sheriff was asked if the killer gave any indication why he did it.  The sheriff was relaying information. Why have a news conference if you're not going to do that?

See, this is the difference between cleverness and wisdom.  
A clever sheriff would accurately remember everything the shooter said - and relay it all.
A wise sheriff might not necessarily have the best memory - but he'd certainly have good instincts in knowing how to avoid triggering trouble.

This sheriff's critics said that he was known to have anti-Asian sentiment himself so he was already on a slippery slope. He will probably be quietly replaced soon.

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:

See, this is the difference between cleverness and wisdom.  
A clever sheriff would accurately remember everything the shooter said - and relay it all.
A wise sheriff might not necessarily have the best memory - but he'd certainly have good instincts in knowing how to avoid triggering trouble.

This sheriff's critics said that he was known to have anti-Asian sentiment himself so he was already on a slippery slope. He will probably be quietly replaced soon.

Yeah, sometimes it's best to not say much to the press.  

He should have called a press conference and just said no comment 163 times.

Original Quill wrote:

JulesV wrote:@ Quill,  was it this sheriff's deputy who was sacked last September? - it's an interesting story which started with an accusation of a BROKEN rear tail light (yes that old chestnut lol) ..... and ended up with BROKEN bones.  
Take a look when you have time, Quill, fascinating!  >>  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=te2IIsVeJGY

It's a sad fact that a whole culture holds beliefs and an ideology that goes against all that America stands for...but that is the south of the US, from Virginia to Texas.

The south is steeped in otherism, and would cry if they witnessed anyone doing what they do (re: your clip) to a white person.  Yet, southerners believe that blacks are an-other species, worthy as beasts of burden, but not deserving of anything but physical abuse.

As you saw in the insurrection of 1/6, and earlier in Charlottesville, their beliefs spill over into animosity toward anyone (white or otherwise) who doesn't accept their premises.  They are prone to violence.  They love their guns.  They believe that reason is a plot against them.  Hence, they are unreachable and unteachable, and must be exiled from a nation and culture that wants to achieve anything close to justice.

Amexit.

JulesV wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

It's a sad fact that a whole culture holds beliefs and an ideology that goes against all that America stands for...but that is the south of the US, from Virginia to Texas.

The south is steeped in otherism, and would cry if they witnessed anyone doing what they do (re: your clip) to a white person.  Yet, southerners believe that blacks are an-other species, worthy as beasts of burden, but not deserving of anything but physical abuse.

As you saw in the insurrection of 1/6, and earlier in Charlottesville, their beliefs spill over into animosity toward anyone (white or otherwise) who doesn't accept their premises.  They are prone to violence.  They love their guns.  They believe that reason is a plot against them.  Hence, they are unreachable and unteachable, and must be exiled from a nation and culture that wants to achieve anything close to justice.

Amexit.

They still have the cheek to keep using that tired old chestnut  " the car had a broken tail light".
And the guy who was beaten up was just a passenger ffs!
A respectful passenger who addressed the cop as "Sir".

US Constitution wrote:The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government...

JulesV wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Yeah, sometimes it's best to not say much to the press.  

He should have called a press conference and just said no comment 163 times.

Madds, you having a "bad day" hon?  

(To coin a phrase)

Maddog wrote:
All my days above room temperature are good ones.  

Maddog wrote:
I just like pointing out nonsense.  

JulesV wrote:

Maddog wrote:
All my days above room temperature are good ones.  

Ah OK.   I asked cos of your eyerolling smiley.
Got a thing about eye rolling!
We had a neighbour who was cross eyed - and she was always very cross too, very moody.
Whenever she angrily rolled her eyes at us, kids,  the good eye spun around, the lazy eye did nothing. It looked demonic!  
Thanks for listening!

Maddog wrote:
I just like pointing out nonsense.  

Pointing guns at innocent folk .... is the biggest nonsense of all.

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:
Ah OK.   I asked cos of your eyerolling smiley.
Got a thing about eye rolling!
We had a neighbour who was cross eyed - and she was always very cross too, very moody.
Whenever she angrily rolled her eyes at us, kids,  the good eye spun around, the lazy eye did nothing. It looked demonic!  
Thanks for listening!




Pointing guns at innocent folk .... is the biggest nonsense of all.

Eye rolling isn't anger ya weirdo.

JulesV wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Eye rolling isn't anger ya weirdo.

I wish someone had told us! She was scary!

Maddog wrote:

JulesV wrote:
I wish someone had told us! She was scary!

Perhaps she felt the same about her neighbors?