General Discussion

Tommy_Carcetti

(44,510 posts)

70. Bear with me for a second here.

Wed May 6, 2015, 10:34 AM

May 2015

1. The two shooters acted criminally, violently and inexcusably by reacting violently to an act that was merely a personal expression, no matter how offensive to their beliefs. They bear responsibility--primary responsibility at that--for their inexcusable actions that injured another person.

And...

2. Pam Geller acted unethically, recklessly and inexcusably by intentionally organizing an event she knew had the likelihood of provoking a violent response just so she could self-servingly justify her pre-existing beliefs to the world. And by intentionally setting up this situation while desiring the intended result, she placed not just the lives of the willing participants at risk, but the lives of third parties (such as the security guard) at risk for her own selfish gain. She too bears some responsibility for her inexcusable actions in intentionally creating a situation she knew could result in death or injury to innocent life.

The two statements above are not mutually exclusive. You do realize that, right?

It is completely possible for more than one party to share responsibility for a wrong. It happens all the time. It shouldn't be that hard for you to grasp that concept.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

No, the shootings are in no way excusable [View all] whatchamacallit May 2015 OP

beheading non believers is also considered the right thing to do in certain religions nt msongs May 2015 #1

Forcing children to do without medical care or medicine is also the "right thing to do", Fred Sanders May 2015 #2

+1 n/t markpkessinger May 2015 #43

Our close allies, the Saudis, seem to think it's the right thing to do for practically any transgression whatchamacallit May 2015 #3

Depends on how much... MellowDem May 2015 #6

Maybe you think the Klan should exercise their rights whatchamacallit May 2015 #7

I think they can... MellowDem May 2015 #12

No be "brave", if that's how you want to characterize Geller's provocation, whatchamacallit May 2015 #14

Geller's not responsible... MellowDem May 2015 #20

Question itcfish May 2015 #26

Two... MellowDem May 2015 #28

Maybe I think they have the right to do so, GGJohn May 2015 #65

Trump agrees with you... MellowDem May 2015 #4

Of course you do whatchamacallit May 2015 #5

No, I was raised conservative Christian... MellowDem May 2015 #8

Well that explains a lot whatchamacallit May 2015 #11

can't yelled if good nature snark... MellowDem May 2015 #13

Twas brillig, and the slithy toves? whatchamacallit May 2015 #16

Can't tell MellowDem May 2015 #18

Nor do I. She's a savvy individual, and knows precisely which bottom-feeders will accept the bait LanternWaste May 2015 #9

And an analog clock frozen at 1:49 will be correct twice a day. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #10

Should have stopped with your title... Oktober May 2015 #15

Haha whatchamacallit May 2015 #17

Thanks... Oktober May 2015 #25

Of course. Because everything is black and white, right? Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #19

She's a victim... MellowDem May 2015 #21

Bullshit whatchamacallit May 2015 #23

Even if she did... MellowDem May 2015 #27

Geller's not a victim. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #32

If violence is never an excuse... MellowDem May 2015 #34

She's no more a victim than you or me. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #38

Because violence is never an excuse... MellowDem May 2015 #40

That's an insane hypothetical. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #41

It illustrates my point perfectly... MellowDem May 2015 #45

Do you think that security guard wanted to be shot? Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #49

It's not like the body guard didn't know the risk... MellowDem May 2015 #56

Bear with me for a second here. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #70

Not for this wrong... MellowDem May 2015 #83

If she knowingly and intentionally contributed to the violence and actually sought that result.... Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #84

Why does it matter what her motivation was again? Oktober May 2015 #24

She wanted violence, and violence she got. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #33

In short... You think that words and 'incitement' are enough to justify violence... Oktober May 2015 #35

In short, you just strawmanned me. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #39

I knew a guy who knocked the shit out of his wife... Oktober May 2015 #47

We're talking about Pam Geller here. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #48

Keep on digging... Oktober May 2015 #52

Can you please explain to me what exactly you think I'm trying to justify here? Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #53

In the sense that her organization was attacked... Oktober May 2015 #54

It should be noted that Geller's group *organized* the event. She herself was not a participant. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #69

You are clinging to some very odd notions... Oktober May 2015 #71

Will you please give it up with the whole "short skirt" analogy? That's a non-starter. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #72

Just because you don't like her... Oktober May 2015 #73

Did the ACLU/NAACP/Code Pink/whatever want to see a violent response that placed people in danger? Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #74

You keep saying it... Oktober May 2015 #75

Do you honestly believe Pam Geller is all about First Amendment? Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #76

You are all over the place... Oktober May 2015 #77

If she's claiming victimhood status--and guess what, she is--it does motivate her. Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #78

Look... Oktober May 2015 #80

Gotcha Cartman. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #81

Agreed. PeaceNikki May 2015 #22

I think Geller was playing off the response to the Charlie Hebdo incident, Maedhros May 2015 #29

They do - there's more room to debate because Geller is such a reprehensible person el_bryanto May 2015 #30

Indeed. n/t whatchamacallit May 2015 #31

Agree totally. NanceGreggs May 2015 #36

I am pleased whatchamacallit May 2015 #37

Nuance is for the few, apparently. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #50

This happened in the US cemaphonic May 2015 #42

It is not an American tradition to insult and vilify an entire other religion, is it? Free speech Fred Sanders May 2015 #46

Actually it IS a new American tradition guillaumeb May 2015 #51

Bears are animals with no control over their behavior BlueStater May 2015 #55

Respectfully disagree mariuma May 2015 #57

Right melman May 2015 #58

Grizzlies are wild animals. Codeine May 2015 #59

Comprehension fail whatchamacallit May 2015 #63

Having an abortion clinic inspires bombers. Codeine May 2015 #64

People seriously don't understand metaphors. nt Tommy_Carcetti May 2015 #66

OP summary: why defend universal freedoms? who are we to blame intolerance? Yorktown May 2015 #60

truly hoping this is sarcasm... mariuma May 2015 #61

Thanks for the love, yes, it was sarcasm. Yorktown May 2015 #62

What projecting on the world? It was in fucking Texas. CBGLuthier May 2015 #67

I was going to post the same thing. Coventina May 2015 #82

You're right about the cultural differences but... randome May 2015 #68

You are aware that we are not living in Saudi Arabia? Arugula Latte May 2015 #79