what the fuck...he shot a couple, over snow, in a state that has the death penalty for murder...is the snow shoveling supposed to lessen his sentence?..."but judge, you see, my hand was forced"
what the fuck...he shot a couple, over snow, in a state that has the death penalty for murder...is the snow shoveling supposed to lessen his sentence?..."but judge, you see, my hand was forced"
Last edited by Ihavewaffles; 2021-02-09 at 08:12 PM.
No, the chilling part was him hurry BACK into his home after he killed two people, like this was something you could run away from..."I got inside! I'm glad that nuisance is over! What is on television?"
Suicide? Well, that settles it...dumb af...all his solutions involve guns..
Would he have shot a clerk over the price of a can of dog food? I wonder...dumb people shouldn't have guns..
Maybe. Maybe if he repeatedly went into the pet store to purchase the can of dog food and on numerous occasions argued over the price with the clerk... maybe.
Regardless of his reasoning/justification for resorting to murder, it's a shame it spawned from something like verbal arguments over fucking shoveling snow.
Yeah, apparently upon knocking at his door the responding officers heard a single gunshot from inside.
This is my view. This guy was always going to do something like this. He was a fucking lunatic.Would he have shot a clerk over the price of a can of dog food? I wonder...dumb people shouldn't have guns..
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.
This was like watching one of those youtube videos with people fighting at walmart, you know they are dumb af, but one of them had a gun this time..
I still don't get the snow thing, they live on the other side of the road from each other, how would snow travel from one house to another? Or the gun guy was mad that some snow ended up on the road between them?
"it's my drive way/road, mother fucker!"
boom
boom
boom
Last edited by Ihavewaffles; 2021-02-09 at 08:29 PM.
nah man they were both still alive when he went inside to get the AR, he came out a third time with another gun (not on the OP video) and shot them again. but they were both definitely still alive after the first clip he used from his pistol
Apparently they were deliberately tossing the snow onto his driveway. I guess there was a long standing feud between them. Who knows what started it.
- - - Updated - - -
You have a source for that?
I haven't read anything about a third gun being used. The video on the OP only has the handgun and the rifle shootings.
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.
Wait, across the road up unto his drive way?...
But that is so much extra work!..
it's cold, who have time to do such stupid shit...geez, looks like everyone were stupid..can't have been that much snow, a little bit of salt would have taken care of it n kept drive way ice free..
We're not arguing this in a court of law, so you need to stop focusing on the notion of legal culpability. We're not discussing that since it has already been stated time and time again that there was no action that justified murder. We're not talking about legal provocation where the reaction might be argued as reasonable. We've already stated time and time again that murder was not a reasonable reaction. I've also stated several times that there is no argument for inevitability. The preceding events did not necessitate this outcome.
When I say "provoke" I mean it in the basic definition of the word; to incite someone to anger. We saw that on the video. When I say "cause and effect" I mean that the outcome was at least in part a response to the preceding events with no value judgement either way. Would this man have killed this people at that exact same time and place had there been no argument? Perhaps, but that's not how the event played out on camera. The only one suggesting that this outcome was predetermined is you if you're claiming that the argument played no part in the shooting. And just because one can say that A led to B doesn't mean that the killer had no agency to change the situation.
No one is conflating "motive" and "justification" except for you. There's no justification, that has already been stated multiple times. Motive doesn't remove agency, it simply explains how or why someone went from point A to point B. It doesn't mean there's a good, just, or reasonable motivation. It simply tells you that there was motivation.
The child killer example you gave makes no sense in the context of this discussion because there's no provocation, no active participation in conflict or escalation.
And, in the way you're using the words, I do not see one whit of provocation to murder, here.
The same way that there wouldn't be with the children.
The hypothetical serial killer would disagree, as would the madman with the gun, but that's why they're murderers rather than reasonable people.
That's why I'm clarifying the difference between motive and justification. Their crazy motive may have driven them to commit murder, but it wasn't justified by the actions of their victims in any way whatsoever. Their victims did not contribute to the motive of the murderer to commit murder. Not one whit.
He'd disagree, but he'd be wrong. And realizing how wrong he was is a likely reason he took his own life.
Stop. Blaming. Victims.
It's sad, because this tells me that you are one of the "good guys" not because you understand it, but because at some point you decided for a side and are just going through the motions without understanding exactly why. It just so happens that this made you a guy with generally decent views. But it seems to me you've never actually sat down and actually thought the whole thing through (with someone). It was sheer chance that made you one of the good guys. And that is depressing, because you are not alone.
Users with <20 posts and ignored shitposters are automatically invisible. Find out how to do that here and help clean up MMO-OT!
PSA: Being a volunteer is no excuse to make a shite job of it.
Yes, the victims deserve to be blamed for what they did. They did not put the gun in their target's hands. He did. The shooter is to be blamed for killing them. I have never blamed anyone for another person's actions. Your comprehension is extremely lacking. I have pointed this out multiple times.
- - - Updated - - -
Your emphasis removed the necessary emphasis to comprehend the statement.
The couple is being blamed for the couple's actions. The couple is not being blamed for the shooter's actions.
Blaming the couple for getting shot is Victim Blaming.
Blaming people for what they chose to do is just Regular Blaming. The fact that they became victim of a crime later does not absolve them of the blame they deserve.
Last edited by Jonnusthegreat; 2021-02-09 at 09:40 PM.
You might have stumbled into the wrong thread :P
- - - Updated - - -
I just want to be clear...because there have been many different positions in this thread about the culpability of the victims.
You would agree then that anyone that says that they are responsible for their deaths is engaging in Victim blaming?
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.
If you re-read my post from two posts ago that you quoted (and specifically deleted), you will find the answer there.
EDIT: Well, it was an edit. Maybe you didn't see:
Your emphasis removed the necessary emphasis to comprehend the statement.
The couple is being blamed for the couple's actions. The couple is not being blamed for the shooter's actions.
Blaming the couple for getting shot is Victim Blaming.
Blaming people for what they chose to do is just Regular Blaming. The fact that they became victim of a crime later does not absolve them of the blame they deserve.
Last edited by Jonnusthegreat; 2021-02-09 at 09:41 PM.
“The biggest communication problem is we do not listen to understand. We listen to reply,” Stephen Covey.