Multiple Sources: Multiple shot including Congress Woman

[Larry]

As for the mental illness angle:

Just as we cannot know that the man was mentally ill, we also cannot know that he wasn't. I based my summery judgment, not on his content, but rather his style. Jumping from subject to subject, without proper articulation, incorrect framing, rambling and incoherent, profound mistrust of his enemies. You would have to be asleep to not see the patterns here.

That's true of 3/4 of the posts in Tailgate.

One thing is for sure.....people rarely use mental illness with any degree of success now-a-days. Prosecutors want someone to pay. The public wants someone to pay. Even if this guy is quite profoundly MI, he will be found guilty. Be certain of that.

Actually, I've read that the average person who's found "not guilty by reason of insanity" spends more time locked up, than the average person found guilty.

[polywog999]

That's true of 3/4 of the posts in Tailgate.

Actually, I've read that the average person who's found "not guilty by reason of insanity" spends more time locked up, than the average person found guilty.

I have studied a lot of cases and have yet to see someone "walk" with an insanity defense. If you have a choice between prison or a state hospital, pick prison. Trust me on this one.

[jnhay]

I really thought the mention of Palin was such an incredible cheap shot. It's so crazy how people are so heartless today that they never stop trying to gain the political advantage, no matter the situation.

I have studied a lot of cases and have yet to see someone "walk" with an insanity defense. If you have a choice between prison or a state hospital, pick prison. Trust me on this one.

Doesn't it depend on the crime? I'm sure prisoners treat people with certain crimes harsher than others.

[aREDSKIN]

I really thought the mention of Palin was such an incredible cheap shot. It's so crazy how people are so heartless today that they never stop trying to gain the political advantage, no matter the situation.

You sort of expect that here on ES but the Media all day yesterday was doing exactly the same thing. All of em at some point. Complete and utter irresponsibility. If they had done their jobs maybe they'd find out that political motivation(s) they conjectured and fostered upon us regarding the shooter was possibly the exact opposite of what they spewed. How they stay in business is beyond me.

[polywog999]

I really thought the mention of Palin was such an incredible cheap shot. It's so crazy how people are so heartless today that they never stop trying to gain the political advantage, no matter the situation.

Doesn't it depend on the crime? I'm sure prisoners treat people with certain crimes harsher than others.

I would rather be dead then locked up in a Mental ward. Period.

[Burgold]

I really thought the mention of Palin was such an incredible cheap shot. It's so crazy how people are so heartless today that they never stop trying to gain the political advantage, no matter the situation.

See, the conversation Adowling, myself, and others had on this subject a few pages back about responsibility. I think if everyone is coming to the same conclusions, that there's way too much violent rhetoric and inflammatory language and that could give someone an extra push, then maybe there's something to it.

[SnyderShrugged]

http://gawker.com/5728605/arizona-shooter-explained-mind-control-on-youtube

Gawker wraps up info about the guy pretty well here. Doesnt seem to be attached to Palin or really any political stripe.

[aREDSKIN]

The 9 year old girl that was killed is related to Dallas Green famed baseball manager.

Among the six killed and 13 injured reportedly in Tucson, Ariz. was 9-year-old third-grader Christina-Taylor Green. Green had two personal connections to Major League Baseball; She was a daughter of Los Angeles Dodgers scout John Green and a granddaughter of former Philadelphia Phillies manager Dallas Green.

http://sports.yahoo.com/mlb/blog/big_league_stew/post/Dallas-Green-s-granddaughter-dies-in-Arizona-sho?urn=mlb-305133

[LD0506]

I am once again impressed at the level of discourse this topic has generated here as opposed to the craziness I have read in other forums this morning.

This is not simply tragic but horrific on many levels. A face-to-face assassination attempt on a sitting member of Congress, a federal judge killed, a child born on 9-11 as well, it almost could not be worse, but what saddens me more than anything is the fact that, in a week or two, it will be old news and sink into the background noise. It will get squeezed mercilessly in this news cycle, private grief will be prostituted for media profit, people will be worried and left wondering why and what's next, and then it will drift away like smoke.

Until the next "event".

[Rodriggo]

I really thought the mention of Palin was such an incredible cheap shot. It's so crazy how people are so heartless today that they never stop trying to gain the political advantage, no matter the situation.

I strongly disagree jnhay.

Sarah Palin used a gunsight to pinpoint political seats that were targets for the Republican/Tea Party/Right Wing miasma in the last election.

That might deserve a pass except for the fact that Rep. Giffords was one of those "targeted".

Now the chickens have come home to roost and it's a cheap shot? Here's the problem for Palin, she continues to prove she is a walking cheap shot.

By all means she should make it a cheap shot by preventing this from being so easy to happen.

Painting targets on the backs of politcal foes DOES have consequences in a country where a 22 yr. old dropout who couldn't get into the U.S. Army can walk into a ******* sports store and walk out with a handgun.

Seems beyond weak to not own your own ****.

Pathetic on top of being so tragic.

[aREDSKIN]

I strongly disagree jnhay.

Sarah Palin used a gunsight to pinpoint political seats that were targets for the Republican/Tea Party/Right Wing miasma in the last election.

That might deserve a pass except for the fact that Rep. Giffords was one of those "targeted".

Now the chickens have come home to roost and it's a cheap shot? Here's the problem for Palin, she continues to prove she is a walking cheap shot.

By all means she should make it a cheap shot by preventing this from being so easy to happen.

Painting targets on the backs of politcal foes DOES have consequences in a country where a 22 yr. old dropout who couldn't get into the U.S. Army can walk into a ******* sports store and walk out with a handgun.

Seems beyond weak to not own your own ****.

Pathetic on top of being so tragic.

Utter BS at this point. Your & the lefts attempt to pin this on Palin/the right/the boogeyman is refuted by the information we have thus far. The info in this thread alone disproves you weak sauce.

[Bang]

I don't think it is Palin's "fault" per sé.

But, if you use violent rhetoric it can be akin to yelling fire in a theater, and she's certainly not the only one doing that. The violent rhetoric and the daily whipped up pictures painted by the talking heads can and do drive some nutjobs to acts of violence. We've seen it.

There are loons out there, as we're all too often reminded. And while there are some loons that might look at Jodie Foster and form a violent fantasy out of something the rest of us don't understand, it's not too hard to see that if we are constantly bombarding people with thought of revolution and fears of tyranny and coupling them with violent imagery,, haw hard is it to expect that some folks might snap?

I'd hate to sit back and wonder if it's intentional,, I'd hate to start to wonder if the imagery and rhetoric was designed to do this.. but I can't let the possibility that it is get out of the back of my head. After all, people have done FAR worse in the name of power.

There should be a level of responsibility used in the rhetoric to account for the fact that there are some people out there who might take such analogies or imagery and go off the deep end.

Surely there is another way to get the same point across?

~Bang

[Rodriggo]

Utter BS at this point. Your & the lefts attempt to pin this on Palin is refuted by the information we have thus far. The info in this thread alone disproves you weak sauce.

Not pinning, just keeping notes.

To you it's BS and might not have a direct connection but it is impossible to ignore the right wing rhetoric that started since November 2008 and was ramped up last summer.

Politcal figures, especially fascists like Palin cannot speak with impunity, no matter how much they wish they could.

Just a sad situation this is.

[aREDSKIN]

Not pinning, just keeping notes.

To you it's BS and might not have a direct connection but it is impossible to ignore the right wing rhetoric that started since November 2008 and was ramped up last summer.

Politcal figures, especially fascists like Palin cannot speak with impunity, no matter how much they wish they could.

Just a sad situation this is.

Ok, your myopia has prevented you from rationally & reasonably assessing fact(s) and distinguishing reality from concrete unmovable predispositions. Where have we seen this before??

[Rodriggo]

I'd hate to sit back and wonder if it's intentional,, I'd hate to start to wonder if the imagery and rhetoric was designed to do this.. but I can't let the possibility that it is get out of the back of my head. After all, people have done FAR worse in the name of power.

~Bang

You are obviously playing devil's advocate and I would argue that would be going too far. Couldn't imagine even the worst, most mainstream right wing political figure wanting something like this to happen.

The story is the tragedy

Secondary is the ease with which this individual could so easily become armed.

Tertiary is the fact that it involved a politician and reflects the vitriolic political discourse as propagated by you know who (not an individual but a group).

[Burgold]

I strongly disagree jnhay.

Sarah Palin used a gunsight to pinpoint political seats that were targets for the Republican/Tea Party/Right Wing miasma in the last election.

I somewhat disagree. I think an exclusive focus on Palin is not appropriate here. Rather, I think that there is an environment being fostered by Palin and her ilk that is constantly preaching anger, hate, and even violence. Certainly, they are not to blame directly for this shooting, every person is responsible for their actions, BUT indirectly it's not inconceivable that the never ending stream of hate, enemy, take our country back, socialist, nazi, and other invectives poured on by the minute without cessation could have an impact.

The problem isn't Palin, but the culture of hate that has persisted, grown,and is embraced by so many.

---------- Post added January-9th-2011 at 10:42 AM ----------

All of us have the ability to self-censor and most of us do this every day. The choice to be responsible does not need to come from the outside from some governmental edict. It starts with you and what you choose to say and how you choose to say it. When a politician prepares a speech, when a political analyst sits at a round table, when a radio or tv guy sits behind the mic they are in control of their tongue. More, a director, editor, speech writer and others can be the voice of reason and help put the brakes on.

There's a reason I don't go walking down the street taking a swing at everyone who annoys me or shouting curse words in a church or in a day care center. You act like professionals can't exercise self-restraint and aren't conscious of what they say. At least 75% of the time they are very conscious of their words and in a speech I'd up that to 90% of the time.

What a pathetic cop out. No, the future is mutable and if we change our behaviors now it will have an impact going forward. More if responsible people shout down the idiots, then the people susceptible to the idiots will not have the fuel they otherwise would.

Silence is sometimes taken as approval.

And my answer is twofold.

First, you have to be better and more responsible. If you can't find that within you then it is incumbant upon the silent majority to stand up and not be silent and shout you down.

To quote a very famous poem...

In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."

---------

To say there is nothing we could do is pathetic. To say we are incapable of self-censoring or demanding better is pathetic. To say, "that's the way it is" is... wait for it... pathetic.

Okay, I can answer this from practical experience.

I've been on the radio for about six years now delivering news and commentary. Before my report goes on the air a producer has to green light the story and then an editor has to approve the script. There's two levels of checks if I'm a dirty rotten loudmouth. Now, if I choose to say something rotten and controversial say like the Greaseman, or Don Imus, or Rush and it's live the radio station has the right to rebuke me, suspend me, or fire me. If I'm a listener or a sponsor, I have the right to direct a complaint at what I consider bad behavior. So, there really are built in checks. If you get someone like a Coulter who is always starting fires and she still gets airtime that's a conscious choice. The producers don't have to put her on. They're making a choice. We also have the choice to take our business elsewhere. If we don't tune in to these shock jock shows... guess what, they'll change their behavior... because their agenda isn't what's important to the tv or radio station... making money is.

Honestly, it's why I get so frustrated with FOX at times. If I even tried to say some of the stuff they routinely do or get away with the exageration or fiction... I'd never be allowed to do another story. There needs to be greater accountability at all levels. Personal. Corporate. Political.

I truly believe that it all bleeds together. I also believe that we need to start being better.

In other words, "Get off my grass!"

I don't think so either. At the end of the day, our actions are our own. Even if someone eggs us on or pours gasoline, we need to be resposible and listen to our conscience and our intellect. In this specific case, I don't even know if the charged atmosphere contributed, but even if it did, the person is ultimately to blame.

Now, that's not to say that the serial killer who was an abused child wasn't influenced by their parent's abuse. There are catalysts, but even if I have great sympathy for the abuse it doesn't forgive the action. Likewise, those who commit the abuse which inspire bad behavior bare a fault and blame though it is at a different level.

I think I explained my opinion on that last part poorly.

Edit: Steven's a lot more concise than I am this evening.

Repeating myself so I don't have to repeat myself.

[Rodriggo]

Ok, your myopia has prevented you from rationally & reasonably assessing fact(s) and distinguishing reality from concrete unmovable predispositions. Where have we seen this before??

You're responding to my posts with a discourse I cannot comprehend.

What have I said that is not factually accurate? I don't understand where you are coming at me from aREDSKIN.

I am responding to another person's post about Sarah Palin, I have not started a seperate thread on my opinion of Palin's influence/involvement on this event.

I am talking to another poster and you are not explaining yourself other than simply criticizing me.

I'd just as soon ignore you but I don't want to rude.

How would you "rationally & reasonably" assess the situation? Pray and move on to the next shooting?

---------- Post added January-9th-2011 at 10:48 AM ----------

I somewhat disagree. I think an exclusive focus on Palin is not appropriate here.

I agree, it's not about her, but she is a figurehead not wholly unrelated.

Maybe it's too soon to look at the situation politically, don't want to offend anyone, but my real issue is gun law which is deeply so.

[@DCGoldPants]

I somewhat disagree. I think an exclusive focus on Palin is not appropriate here. Rather, I think that there is an environment being fostered by Palin and her ilk that is constantly preaching anger, hate, and even violence. Certainly, they are not to blame directly for this shooting, every person is responsible for their actions, BUT indirectly it's not inconceivable that the never ending stream of hate, enemy, take our country back, socialist, nazi, and other invectives poured on by the minute without cessation could have an impact.

The problem isn't Palin, but the culture of hate that has persisted, grown,and is embraced by so many.

I agree with you.

I think a lot of folks are making this connection quickly because of quotes like this.

Sarah Palin's list has a gun sight over our district. They have to realize there are consequences to that."

[twa]

Speaking of mental disabilities ,perhaps the left should examine why these are your projected responsible parties?

Afghan vet

Palin fan

Tea Party

Glenn

Rush

[Stadium-Armory]

Utter BS at this point. Your & the lefts attempt to pin this on Palin/the right/the boogeyman is refuted by the information we have thus far. The info in this thread alone disproves you weak sauce.

I think you're kidding your self if you think the same thing wouldn't happen if roles were reversed. Imagine if Obama had identified all of the members of congress who voted against health care as targets, and had used the cross hairs images and such -- and then someone went out and shot one of them. "You and the right" would be screaming to the high hills that he had incited them to do it -- and frankly you'd have an argument, or at least it would be worth discussing as we are doing here.

[NavyDave]

Not pinning, just keeping notes.

To you it's BS and might not have a direct connection but it is impossible to ignore the right wing rhetoric that started since November 2008 and was ramped up last summer.

Politcal figures, especially fascists like Palin cannot speak with impunity, no matter how much they wish they could.

Just a sad situation this is.

Oh please stop. Liberals, Progressives, Far left wing nuts, CNN commentators (hoping it was an angry white person instead of a muslim), followers of the Huffington post and mediamatters have been trying to pin every horrific event the past 3 years own either Tax Enough Already members, the GOP or Palin and it appeared that they were more upset to learn the monsters in all cases had extreme left/ progressive leanings and or was a member of a demographic the left has among its victims class.

Or do you have amnesia when it comes to the Holocaust Museum shooter, The Discovery Channel building nut or the guy who flew his plane into a building?

Liberals are soooo quick and predictable to not demand personal responsibility of the person who commits heinous act if they are not conservative or a perfect Straw man/woman, choosing to put the blame on something or someone else who is those things.

[aREDSKIN]

I think you're kidding your self if you think the same thing wouldn't happen if roles were reversed. Imagine if Obama had identified all of the members of congress who voted against health care as targets, and had used the cross hairs images and such -- and then someone went out and shot one of them. "You and the right" would be screaming to the high hills that he had incited them to do it -- and frankly you'd have an argument, or at least it would be worth discussing as we are doing here.

Hypotheticals don't work well in a tragic & fact based discussions. There is no evidence, THUS FAR, to support any conjecture that this person was influenced by anybody on the right. The evidence, THUS FAR, supports just the opposite. It's right here in this thread.

[Rodriggo]

Liberals are soooo quick and predictable to not demand personal responsibility of the person who commits heinous act if they are not conservative or a perfect Straw man/woman, choosing to put the blame on something or someone else who is those things.

I see a situation like the one that just happened and try to solve it.

You can't solve crazy but you can make it more difficult or damn near impossible for a person like this to buy a handgun.

Those that stand in the way of that happening are more often than not "conservative" and thus not wholly unrelated to events like this regardless of the specific "beliefs" of the perpetrators and thus not beyond reproach as you believe.

[NavyDave]

I think you're kidding your self if you think the same thing wouldn't happen if roles were reversed. Imagine if Obama had identified all of the members of congress who voted against health care as targets, and had used the cross hairs images and such -- and then someone went out and shot one of them. "You and the right" would be screaming to the high hills that he had incited them to do it -- and frankly you'd have an argument, or at least it would be worth discussing as we are doing here.

Obama wouldn't use crosshairs because he and liberals are anti 2nd amendment.

Even 5 watt lightbulbs pretending to be even dimmer than they normally are, know the images were designed to display the democrats (bluedogs and liberals) for being voted out of office.

[aREDSKIN]

I see a situation like the one that just happened and try to solve it.

You can't solve crazy but you can make it more difficult or damn near impossible for a person like this to buy a handgun.

Those that stand in the way of that happening are more often than not "conservative" and thus not wholly unrelated to events like this regardless of the specific "beliefs" of the perpetrators and thus not beyond reproach as you believe.

Yep, Gabby Giffords was just that type of "conservative".