CNN Wants to Profile White Men for Shootings

Link (it's a video)

Quote :

CNN's Don Lemon discusses the possibility of profiling white men in an attempt to prevent gun violence and decrease the amount of mass shootings. Lemon argues that white males between the ages of 18 and 25 were behind nearly all recent mass killings.

Lemon is from Salon.com. This reinforces the theory that anyone who puts a Salon writer on national TV immediately loses legitimacy.

There's a GodAwful SpiderThing joke in here somewhere, but I'm not good enough to find it...

Look at it this way: now white men will know how it feels to have someone assuming you're dangerous because of your race.

some douchebag wrote:

I'm not saying we should be racially profiling white guys

Yes you are.

xerrofoot wrote:

Look at it this way: now white men will know how it feels to have someone assuming you're dangerous because of your race.

Yeah my first thought was along similar lines. Profiling is cool as long as it's for brown people?

White males are already profiled for most serial killings, what now they are also school shooters? Tsk,tsk, tsk.

I honestly want to know how they're going to profile them to keep them from mass shooting. No guns until they're 60? They have to prove that they were't bullied in school?

I really hate double standards.

Either it's acceptable to stereotype/discriminate/whatever against everyone, or it's not acceptable to do so against anyone. Choose.

grmblfjx wrote:

xerrofoot wrote:

Look at it this way: now white men will know how it feels to have someone assuming you're dangerous because of your race.

Yeah my first thought was along similar lines. Profiling is cool as long as it's for brown people?

I disagree but don't at the same time? I think it's fucked up that profiling happens at all. This isn't better, really. Just fairer.

grmblfjx wrote:

xerrofoot wrote:

Look at it this way: now white men will know how it feels to have someone assuming you're dangerous because of your race.

Yeah my first thought was along similar lines. Profiling is cool as long as it's for brown people?

The best part of the double standard is that the people who are so vocally against profiling against ANYONE who isn't a white male is smugly laughing "how do YOU like it" when it IS a white male.

Plus, we're already profiled plenty. Name one corporate villain in media that isn't white. Gordon Gekko, Larry the Liquidator, Rankin Fitch, Satan himself in Devil's Advocate, and so on. Everyone seems to be under the impression that white men are rich assholes, when we're obviously not all rich.

Did any of you fucking drooling troglodytes actually watch this video? No one is actually advocating racial profiling in this video. No one. In fact, all of the interviewees conclude that predicting any kind of mass shooting is basically impossible.

All this is just a sensationalistic right-wing excuse for journalism, and anyone who engages without that realization is playing into the farcical circus that is American news media.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Lemon is from Salon.com

No, Mikey. Lemon is from CNN. The man from Salon.com is the interviewee, David Sirota. And Lemon, in professional journalistic form, is not arguing anything. He asks his guests pointed questions and lets them explain their own views. Pull your head out of Rupert Murdoch's anus.

The reason profiling mass killings is so hard is because while most of the guys have signs of mental illness, they're generally using legally owned guns anyway so WHAT THE FUCK IS THE POINT?!

How about banning the medications all these shooters happen to be on (that make them suicidal in the first place) instead?

Oh wait, then you wouldn't have an excuse to disarm the population and turn the rest of the bill of rights into toilet paper.

V3N0M wrote:

How about banning the medications all these shooters happen to be on (that make them suicidal in the first place) instead?

I'll drink to that. All medication does is make them detached at best (and violent at worst) and placates everyone around the shooter without actually addressing the problems. There's a reason that pharma industry's profits are riding high while kindergarteners are being massacred.

I don't think an outright ban is in order, but stricter guidelines on how to handle them would be helpful. Especially since a lot of the psychotic episodes seem to happen in the middle of changing prescriptions and dosages. Combination of withdrawal/getting slammed with a shitload of new SSRI drugs does weird things to the brain.

There was an incident awhile back when a kid took his class hostage until he just snapped out of it in the middle of it. No one was hurt, fortunately. His dad's suing the drug company. Or sued, I'm not sure how long ago that was.

A more sensible, measured approach is in order. Because as weird, dangerous, and often tragic as these incidents are, there are a lot more people who honestly need these drugs.

V3N0M wrote:

How about banning the medications all these shooters happen to be on (that make them suicidal in the first place) instead?

Oh wait, then you wouldn't have an excuse to disarm the population and turn the rest of the bill of rights into toilet paper.

Ban my Prozac and I'll shoot you first.

Quote :

I'll drink to that. All medication does is make them detached at best (and violent at worst)

How do you know that?

Probably from being on medication

Owlish wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

How about banning the medications all these shooters happen to be on (that make them suicidal in the first place) instead?

I'll drink to that. All medication does is make them detached at best (and violent at worst) and placates everyone around the shooter without actually addressing the problems. There's a reason that pharma industry's profits are riding high while kindergarteners are being massacred.

Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, the pharmaceutical industry is profitable because they produce a product people are willing to pay for (ruggers need aspirin, goddamnit), and kindergartners get shot because autistic people are a fucking menace.

To imply that pharmaceutical companies are the underlying reason behind shootings either makes you a brilliant troll or a dangerously insane human being.

Mikey Go WOOGA wrote:

Owlish wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

How about banning the medications all these shooters happen to be on (that make them suicidal in the first place) instead?

I'll drink to that. All medication does is make them detached at best (and violent at worst) and placates everyone around the shooter without actually addressing the problems. There's a reason that pharma industry's profits are riding high while kindergarteners are being massacred.

Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, the pharmaceutical industry is profitable because they produce a product people are willing to pay for (ruggers need aspirin, goddamnit), and kindergartners get shot because autistic people are a fucking menace.

To imply that pharmaceutical companies are the underlying reason behind shootings either makes you a brilliant troll or a dangerously insane human being.

So close to a good, sensible post, Michael. Keep trying, you'll get there eventually.



Owlish, are you a Scientologist?

The only reason why this is an issue at all is because we're trying to slap a probability on something that is only predictable to a certain extent. I think it's pretty hilarious that they're attempting to propose that profiling in order to solve a problem is a good idea while also being too skiddish to outwardly say that profiling, for their cause, is justified.

It's kind of fun to watch the news media struggle with talking about race.

I do love the assumption that all mass shooters are a) mentally ill b) on drugs.

I love how all you do is snark everything without providing an ounce of proof. And how the media seems to be forgetting that our most recent shooter was black (and also on SSRIs)

If it wasn't for Prozac my girlfriend wouldn't have done anything except kill herself, I'm dead serious maybe SSRIs make some people do that but way to demonize the mentally ill you fucking cuntbubble

I'm just sick of the demonization of mental illness by the mass media

Quote :

cuntbubble

So edgy, your ability to combine random words together has instantly converted me to your thinking.

In all seriousness, did it ever occur to you that an antidepressant that sometimes does the opposite of what it is supposed to do probably SHOULD be banned and replaced?

Every brain drug sometimes does the opposite of what it should do. That is the nature of fucking with brain chemistry.

Drugs are a useful tool for dealing with mental illness, but they are not a cure-all. Lots of people need therapy or extra people monitoring them or whatever else in addition to the drugs.

venom i'm not going to fuck you, quit messaging me