Details Analysis of Mass Shooters and Manifestos

Discussion in 'Off-topic Political' started by Nemo, Aug 4, 2019.

  1. Nemo

    Nemo Man of Myth and Legend

    12,824
    829
    113
    and discussion of those shooters thinking. Should their manifestos be published?

    Nemo

    https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/08/el-paso-shootings-free-speech-curbs/

     
  2. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,631
    1,711
    113
    Absolutely not. Damn the 1st Amendment! :groupprotest:

    We don't want ordinary citizens reading them and perhaps finding a nugget or two of truth amongst all the garbage. We wouldn't want anyone thinking the govt might be shirking its mandated duties or doing things that impair the well being of the peoples.
     

  3. RedDawnTheMusical

    RedDawnTheMusical Well-Known Member

    10,793
    316
    83
    The manifestos are typically deranged rantings of hate. As such, they can likely fuel the hate in others and reinforce that there are others that share their ideologies. But, with deranged people, they can twist anything into supporting their ideologies. I think that the actual mass shootings are far more impactful motivators than the junk that is published in the manifestos. Additionally, I detest any form of censorship. As such, I have no issue with the publication of the manifestos.
     
  4. NTA

    NTA Well-Known Member

    7,272
    130
    63
    I don't listen to nit wits, much less read their crap.
     
  5. NTA

    NTA Well-Known Member

    7,272
    130
    63
    Then again, maybe the common theme in these shootings is having a manifesto. I don't know any regular folks that have one.
     
  6. RedDawnTheMusical

    RedDawnTheMusical Well-Known Member

    10,793
    316
    83
    Usually the agenda-driven whack jobs that are supporting some kind of ideology have one. The straight-sociopaths (like the Dayton shooter) don't see to fall into that category - just some social media posts, etc.
     
  7. dhaller

    dhaller Active Member

    301
    76
    28
    They should be treated as evidence.

    They should be available to law enforcement, and to the academy for study; they can be subject to a public information request.

    They shouldn't be published; if they are, they become profit-generating content for the media - that's just wrong - and they can continue to radicalize people.

    DH
     
  8. moe mensale

    moe mensale Well-Known Member

    12,631
    1,711
    113
    Did either of you read the El Paso shooter's screed? I posted a link to it in the "Texas Walmart Shooting" thread but here it is again.

    https://thefederalistpapers.org/opinion/el-paso-shooters-entire-purported-manifesto

    I'm not condoning what he did nor do I accept everything he (supposedly) wrote. But there are several truths in it whether you accept them or not. I don't believe it will radicalize anyone except the weakest willed individual. There are several concepts in it that have been publicly discussed for several years now. Is he really trying to radicalize anyone or just trying to keep the light on some potentially bad social issues?
     
  9. Malum Prohibitum

    Malum Prohibitum Moderator Staff Member

    67,050
    1,428
    113
    Even if nothing at all is true in anything, the First Amendment is violated by a law forbidding writing or speaking about white supremacy, or any other topic, for that matter.
     
    ber950 likes this.