Did Paranoid Right-Wing Media Fuel the Pittsburgh Cop Killer's Rage?

[Postman]

http://www.alternet.org/rights/135592/did_paranoid_right-wing_media_fuel_the_pittsburgh_cop_killer%27s_rage/?page=1

[MercutioATC]

1. I voted for Obama and I support gun rights...and even I'M not convinced he won't reinstate the AWB

The right-wing media isn't "paranoid" if they're right.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WilliamPitt]

16. No, that's MercutioATC. He's been here forever.

And he has a right to his opinion.

Rush is the kind of guy who attacks others for having different opinions.

Sounds familiar.

[JTFrog]

19. And if his opinion is that right wingers are correct, then he can accept the consequences of stating

that opinion.

[MercutioATC]

22. Thanks for vouching :)

You may or may not agree with me, but I appreciate you confirming my standing here.

[WilliamPitt]

23. You've been here longer than the sink in the men's room.

;)

[MercutioATC]

25. I'm obviously one hell of a good troll...

;)

[WilliamPitt]

27. Welcome to the club. We get jackets.

:P

[MercutioATC]

29. Yeah, I remember your lynching.

I've always really enjoyed reading your stuff and I always cringe when the mob starts to murmur.

Hell, I'm gonna keep injecting my version of thought into this board and I'm really glad you came back to do the same.

[WilliamPitt]

31. Cheers.

:toast:

...and thanks.

[SidDithers]

39. One of them deep, deep, deep sleeper agents, I guess...

:evilgrin: :hi:

Sid

[MercutioATC]

41. I would tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

Hey, Sid :)

:hi:

[paulsby]

97. good for you

i get so tired of the "omg you are a rw troll" or "oh noes that's a RW talking point" type accusations when you DARE disagree with the "party line" on something.

the truth IS that obama has an abyssmal record in supporting civil rights of gun owners, and lets not even get started on the joyce foundation, etc.

it doesn't make one a RW troll to point out that there is a basis to believe that obama wants to significantly encroach on our rights vis a vis guns.

[aikoaiko]

34. See DU rules

http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules_detailed.html

"Do not publicly accuse another member of this message board of being a disruptor, conservative, Republican, FReeper, or troll, or do not otherwise imply they are not welcome on Democratic Underground. If you think someone is a disruptor, click the "Alert" link below their post to let the moderators know."

[JTFrog]

37. Direct this to post #16 then. AND....

Perhaps you should follow your own advice. You must know all the rules and what is allowed and not, eh?

:shrug:

[aikoaiko]

40. What advice is that? I didn't call anyone a conservative, freeper, etc?

Yes, he broke the rule too. Mercutio see this rule.

Are you happy now?

[JTFrog]

42. The advice to just hit the button.

:shrug:

But, yes, thanks for pointing out the hypocrisy.

[aikoaiko]

47. You're correct that is suggested that one hit the alert button in some cases

but also from the DU rules:

"You are permitted to post polite behavioral corrections to other members of the message board, in direct response to specific instances of incivility, provided that your comments are narrowly focused on the behavior. But you are not permitted to make broad statements about another person's behavior in general, and you are not permitted to post repeated reminders about another person's mistakes. "

I hope I was polite, albeit terse, and narrowly focused.


I suppose I am sensitive to the "freeper" accusation because I too am a moderate Democrat and have had the glove smacked across my face from time to time.

[JTFrog]

50. It was cool how you zoomed in on me first tho.

Hypocrisy is the bestest.

:thumbsup:

[aikoaiko]

53. Well you were the first transgressor.

:spank:

[JTFrog]

55. And to me the first transgression was parroting right wing nutcases.

So we'll just have to agree to disagree.


:shrug:

[MercutioATC]

56. Just a quick question...

Your cite states

"You are permitted to post polite behavioral corrections to other members of the message board, in direct response to specific instances of incivility..."


When you first asked if I was Rush, at what point had I exhibited any incivility?

[JTFrog]

57. I find it pretty incivil to parrot right wing talking points in this case. n/t

[MercutioATC]

58. I don't feel the need to belabor the point, but your definition of "incivility" is odd.

incivility
Noun
pl -ties
1. rudeness
2. an impolite act or remark


I was neither rude nor impolite.

You might have taken issue with my opinion, but I take offense to being accused of incivility (in this case).


When I'm exhibiting incivility, you'll know it.

[JTFrog]

60. Parroting right wing talking points displays a lack of courtesy here.

That's my opinion and you of course are free to disagree.

[MercutioATC]

62. But what if it's not "parroting", but simply a belief that differs from yours?

It's not like I just squawked "Obama wants to take our guns". I explained why I thought somebody with this concern might see evidence of this through Holder's statement that he wants to reinstate the AWB and Obama's refusal to just state that he won't let that happen.

Sorry, but if that's your view of "parroting right wing talking points" you really need to grow up a bit.

[JTFrog]

66. You specifically defended the right wing media as being correct and not "paranoid".

You might as well have just squawked instead. All the justification in the world doesn't change the message.

I'll grow up just fine without propping up the likes of Beck and Limbaugh, thank you very much.

[MercutioATC]

71. On this issue, I do. I'm not convinced that Obama won't reinstate the AWB.

Whether it's the BBC or TYT or FOX reporting it, Obama's own AG said that he wants to reinstate the AWB and Obama himself has refused to make contrary statements.

Realistic or not, for a lot of gun owners, this reads like the first step to gun confiscation.

[JTFrog]

74. Realistic?

Reality is that he HASN'T reinstated the AWB.

Reality is that the right wing media is using this issue to try incite riots and "revolution". I'm sure they appreciate any credibility you can lend them.

"We have nothing to fear but fear itself."
"Fear is the mind killer."

Fear on little soldier.

[MercutioATC]

78. You're being obtuse.

The AG that Obama hired said that he wants to reinstate an AWB and Obama hasn't said anything to the contrary.

I think it's fair to say that this administration will at least attempt to reinstate an AWB if it feels that it can get away with it.


That's not some irrational scenario created by the media, it's the statement of the Attorney General.

[JTFrog]

80. And you're being a fear monger.

Whatever floats your boat.

[MercutioATC]

84. So you feel it's "paranoid" to expect another AWB even though the AG has come right out and SAID

that he wants one?

If one of Bush's people has said that he wanted to shut down all "liberal" internet sites, it'd just be "fear mongering" to express concern?

Bullshit, and you know it.

[JTFrog]

86. I think it's bullshit to stir up shit over something that HAS NOT HAPPENED.

It's no better than Beck, Hannity and Rush.

Here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBIpfAl8cpI

Rick Sanchez says it better than I ever could.

[MercutioATC]

88. So people should wait until he actually DOES it to prepare?

That kinda defeats the purpose of planning, doesn't it?

All Obama has to do is clearly state that he will not sign any legislation that bans any firearms and this issue would diminish by at least half. Until then, people will be rightfully concerned...especially in light of Holder's statement.

[JTFrog]

89. "...this administration has no intention of doing anything that would affect a states regulation

"...this administration has no intention of doing anything that would affect a states regulation of firearms, who can carry a firearm.. There is nothing that we have discussed, nothing that is in the planning, nothing that I can imagine that we're going to be doing in that regard."

Eric Holder
U.S. Attorney General
From January 15 Confirmation Hearing

OBAMA IS NOT GOING TO TAKE YOUR FUCKING GUNS AWAY. JUST QUIT IT ALREADY.

[MercutioATC]

93. From that same hearing:

"I think you had asked me earlier about the regulations that I thought might still exist, post-Heller. And I had mentioned, I think, closing the gun show loophole, the banning of cop-killer bullets and I also think that making the assault weapons ban permanent would be something that would be permitted under Heller, and I also think would be good for my law enforcement perspective."

...and from a Feb. 25th news conference:

""There are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons"


That sure sounds like renewing the AWB to me...

[JTFrog]

104. Just write up your

fucking I told you so post now, right here and I'll bookmark this thread.

Until Obama or his administration actually introduce legislation that upholds your FEAR, all you are doing is stirring up shit.

[paulsby]

99. what a ridiculous double standard

would you apply the same logic to something that a RW'er has stated is his intention.

"oh, it hasn't happened yet", so it's not a CONCERN?

talk about REactive.

i prefer to be proactive.

[JTFrog]

105. Until Obama or his administration actually introduce any such legislation, drumming up CONCERN

is more than a little anti productive.

Shit is bad enough without fueling the fire for these whackjobs out there and people are getting killed because of it.

[paulsby]

106. and telling people

they shouldn't be concerned about civil rights issues until the rights are actually legislated away is worse than "bad enough".

i especially enjoy the scare tactics. yup, better not to call people out for anti-constitutional policy preferences lest PEOPLE GET KILLED.

am i either with you or against you?

[JTFrog]

107. If there was an actual anti-constitutional policy in place or currently being proposed

you might have a point.

If I didn't fall for Beck and Limbaugh's shit, I'm certainly not gonna fall for yours. I know exactly who is using trumped up "fear" of losing a constitutional rights as a scare tactic.

[paulsby]

108. this has already been explained to you

holder has already said he would like to see such a law, and obama has an abysmal record of supporting the civil rights of gun owners/users.

personally, i doubt it will happen, but it's hardly a baseless fear.

[JTFrog]

109. It's baseless as a defense for right wing media whores pimping

this "Obama is going to take your guns away" "paranoia".

[paulsby]

110. again, you misunderstand

you are all about "them bad us good" not about the underlying facts.

i'm not defending rw media whores.

i'm discussing the underlying issue which is that it is not a baseless fear considering obama's track record, and holder's statements.

you are more concerned with attacking messengers than in checking their message

[JTFrog]

111. If you look at the original post that started my bizzare journey through this thread:

"The right-wing media isn't "paranoid" if they're right."

:eyes:

[paulsby]

112. and i have no problem with that

in regards to the AWB issue, because being concerned about it given obama/holder's track record and public statements is NOT paranoid.

[paulsby]

98. bingo

that is an incredibly contentless way of dismissing somebody's opinion.

"that's a RW talking point".

because it says nothing about the actual underlying issue and why the person is (allegedly) wrong.

it's like callin somebody a name.

[aikoaiko]

67. I think you were civil.,

and accurate.

President Obama's website said he seeks to reauthorize the AWB. I don't understand how any DUer can claim otherwise.

[MercutioATC]

43. I stand duly chastised.

I hang my head in shame.

[ShareTheWoods]

64. Speaking of paranoia. N/T

[JTFrog]

68. Yes, Rush does promote paranoia.

Your point?

[ShareTheWoods]

72. My point is that ATC was not parroting rush

[JTFrog]

75. Seems to me that Rush would be one of the first to stand up for the right wing media. n/t

[Bandit]

30. How did America ever survive when the Assault Weapons ban was in effect?

God talk about Henny Penny...

[aikoaiko]

35. No so well, the voters choose Republicans for the House and Senate soon thereafter.

I don't want a repeat.

[TorchTheWitch]

32. This isn't about the AWB

So you can stop talking about it in this thread. The article doesn't say anything about the AWB or what hate radio might have said about it. This thread is about general hate radio bloviating like One World Order, martial law, FEMA concentration camps for the citizenry, Stormfront's neo-Nazi rhetoric, etc. Of course, if you actually read the article, you'd know that.

[MercutioATC]

33. Of course it is.

Renewing (or passing an expanded version of) the AWB is what many people see as the first step to gun confiscation.

Rational or not (and I don't believe it's all that irrational) that's where a new AWB leads in many people's minds.

[TorchTheWitch]

44. THIS thread is not

The article in the OP specifically states what sort of paranoid hate speech from people like Glen Beck and Alex Jones and Lou Dobbs and Stormfront, etc., and none of it has anything to do with the AWB. LEGITIMATE fears concerning the AWB is NOT what this thread is about however much you wish to make it so. Kindly stop hyjacking threads that have nothing to do with the AWB because it's your pet issue. If you want to talk about the AWB then start a thread about it where you can talk about it all you like.

[MercutioATC]

52. This thread is about whether the "paranoid right-wing media" made this happen.

...or, at least, "fueled the fire".

I'm directly responding to that question by stating that the "paranoid right-wing media" might not be so "paranoid" when one considers that the Attorney General of the United States has publicly ststed that he wants to reinstate the AWB.

So no, I don't think it's solely the fault of ANY media source. If Obama's not going to grab guns, he should just clearly say so and muzzle his appointees who have different goals.

[TorchTheWitch]

65. READ the damn ARTICLE this thread is ABOUT

Once again, the TYPE of "paranoid right-wing media" at issue in THIS thread is NOT about the AWB though you are falling all over yourelf trying to make it so even by mentioning that the AG said he wants to reinstate the AWB, which is NOT part of the article nor part of the discussion in THIS thread. You are hyjacking this thread even more now by continuing to go on and on about the AWB. Rational discussion of the AWB by the right wing media is NOT what the article and this thread is about, so stop it. THIS thread is about what is discussed in the article and no where in the article is the AWB even mentioned.

GO MAKE A THREAD ABOUT THE AWB AND STOP HYJACKING THIS THREAD!

[MercutioATC]

69. What you don't understand is that it's all the same to some people.

Again, the OP asks whether the "paranoid right wing media" had a significant causal effect.

I maintain that it did not. Being a lot more plugged in to gun owners than you seem to be, I honestly believe that Obama's refusal to deny that his administration is going to reinstate the AWB has a lot more to do with this than anything some right-wing radio jock said.

There's a great distrust among some gun owners of Democrats. Holder stating that he wants to reinstate the AWB (and that's real news, not right-wing spin) is just the first step to gun confiscation to some people (and California's behavior on the issue only reinforces that view).


So yes, I believe Holder's statements about the AWB are pertinent to this discussion. I believe they had more to do with the shooter's decisions than any journalist/TV personality/radio jockey did.

[liberalhistorian]

36. And the problem with the AWB is?..........................

Please explain to me why ANYHONE other than in the military needs, and should have the right to, own automatic weapons. And if you put your precious deadly toys ahead of the safety and security of fellow Americans, then I've got nothing else to say to you.

[MercutioATC]

46. The AWB has absolutely nothing to do with automatic weapons.

It banned certain semiautomatic (one trigger pull, one bullet) weapons...solely based on how they looked.

THIS is bad:



THIS is O.K.:




...even though both are mechanically identical. Both are .308 gas-operated semiautomatic rifles with a detachable magazine. Actually, the "hunting rifle" in the bottom picture would be marginally better at longer ranges.


Automatic weapon ownership has been heavily restricted by the Federal Firearms Control Act of 1934 since....well....1934. The AWB doesn't even address fully automatic weapons.

[paulsby]

100. ignorance of the AWB

the AWB is not about AUTOMATIC WEAPONS.

those are already heavily regulated, and was not what the AWB addressed.

first, get some understanding. THEN, form an opinion.

[slay]

85. I'm not for banning guns or anything - however, our guns will do little against an Army or SWAT team

Other than that, I think my .38 will do just fine.

[paulsby]

101. guns would be quite effective against a SWAT team

i am a cop. i have trained and done entries with our SWAT team.

i am also a firearms instructor.

SWAT teams are not magickal all powerful superheroes.

consider that two SWAT guys recently died in oakland.

from one guy with no special mad skillz

[slay]

113. Soooo - remind me - how did that end up for him?

You missed my point - you can have a shit ton of guns if that's your thing, but against a whole army of police or military, they will just outlast you.. all those guns david koresh had didn't seem to help them too well in the end did they?.. so my point is yeah, guns are good to hold off an intruder or 3, but they aint saving your ass if the govenment comes at ya in force.. talkin end game, not shooting a few cops then gettin taken down.. what's the point in that?

[paulsby]

119. better to die on your feet than live on your knees

would be the point.

look, those are also isolated incidents.

we are talking about IF there was massive widespread govt. invasion of individual sovereignty.

given a repressive govt., that govt. would be significantly deterred in door to door sweeps and let alone throwing people into boxcars for extermination when those people are ARMED.

i am not saying it would be easy.

i am saying that WITHOUT firearms, resisting would be futile.

with them, there would at least be a chance AND it would offer a deterrent to the forces of evil in coming after mom and pop.

[slay]

120. Sorry, I've got more realistic things to worry about

Though I do agree with die on your feet than live on your knees - I just don't think guns are the answer - especially to fight off a "govenment invasion". We'll just have to disagree on that. Also, the Dems are much more responsive to the reactions of "the people" than republicans are, and even though Obama is turning out to be wayyyyyy more of a corporate dem than I would like, he's not gonna ban guns. Simple as that. Too many liberals would step up and - follow the logic - if we ban guns then only the criminals will have them. So, no need to worry over nothing. I see pollution and pure human stupidy to be a much more real threat to our continued existance. But let me just re-asssure you cause ya seem pretty freaked out about this whole thing - the dems will NOT ban or take away guns. My favorite Dem politician is Dennis Kucinich and even I would not be for that. Just. will. not. happen.

[BridgeTheGap]

5. Yes. n.t

[hobbit709]

6. It certainly didn't defuse it.

[Marrah_G]

7. I think it probably fed directly into his mental illness.

[empyreanisles]

8. MercutioATC, if the Assault Ban is allowed to expire ...

can you give me an example of a gun you could own at that point, which you could not own DURING the ban?

[Junkdrawer]

10. the Assault Ban DID expire ...

and the AK-47 that killed the Pittsburgh cops was one of the guns that became legal.

[MercutioATC]

11. If it was an actual AK-47, it's been illegal to own since 1934.

The AWB sunsetting had nothing to do with it.

(because Poplawski didn't have a Class 3 FFL)

[empyreanisles]

12. OK. Thank you both for clearing things up.

[Junkdrawer]

13. It was an "actual AK-47". You can't simply redefine the words...

because now you want to run from the facts. Just like you can't redefine the meaning of "Interest Rate" because it makes Payday Lenders look bad.

Semi-Automatic AK-47s are "actual AK-47s"

Full-Automatic AK-47s are "actual AK-47s"

Lifting the AWB is partially responsible for those three deaths. And believe me, most people I talk to in Pittsburgh know it.

[MercutioATC]

15. You're the one redefining words.

An AK-47 is a fully automatic assault rifle built by Kalashnikov.

Many other small manufacturers, often without license, have built semiautomatic AK-47 lookalikes. These are not AK-47s any more than one of those 1970's Volkswagen kit cars was a "Ferrari".


If it was actually an AK-47, the AWB had no bearing because the AWB says absolutely nothing about fully automatic rifles.

[empyreanisles]

18. So are *FULLY* automatic rifles banned under some other law?

I'm thinking about hardcore firepower like the FN-FAL and the P-90.

(BTW, I only know about these guns because of computer games I play).

[MercutioATC]

20. Umm...YEAH. The Federal Firearm Control Act of 1934.

1934.

I'll say it again, 1934.

(not completely banned, but one must have a Class 3 federal firearms license whick requires an extensive FBI background check, a tariff of $200 per year per firearm, and unnanounced surprise inspections)

The P-90 and the FN-FAL are both fully automatic weapons.

[empyreanisles]

21. Got it. Hey look, I am clueless about all this stuff. Don't even own a gun.

But am becoming more interested in them as I grow older.... :)

[MercutioATC]

24. No problem. We all learn new stuff every day.

You're asking questions. That's great.

Some of the other people here are stating "facts" that simply aren't true, and that's a problem.


I don't hunt, but I like to target shoot every once in a while. The best advice I could give you (if you're considering gun ownership) is to buy something comfortable and cheap to shoot, not something "macho"...at least to start.

Proficiency is much more valuable than caliber. Get comfortable with a .22, and THEN decide if you want something more powerful.

[slackmaster]

48. The AW ban did NOT affect availability of semiautomatic AK-47 style rifles

Nor did its expiration. The ban covered only rifles with certain features, which were not necessary for the rifle to function.

Lifting the AWB is partially responsible for those three deaths.

That is nonsense.

[FudaFuda]

82. Actually, a person is responsible for those deaths. Not the AK.

Also, shooter used a shotgun to kill at least one of the cops, maybe two. All details aren't out.

[MercutioATC]

14. It DID sunset, but sure...

I couldn't own this gun:


A Ruger 10-22 22 caliber rifle which, without the fancy stock, looks like this:



But I could own this gun, a Remington 750 Woodsman:



Which is mechanically identical to this (illegal) gun:




...the AWB banned certain firearms because of how they LOOKED, not how "dangerous" they were.

[baldguy]

116. So the selection of a firearm is based primarily on fashion more than anything else.

After all two weapons could be mechanically identical, but one is artistically designed to emulate a military-style assault weapon (to the extent that it can't be distinguished on visual inspection) and the other is not.

Haute couture is a bitch.

[slackmaster]

117. I think the allure of forbidden things has a lot to do with it

I believe that if the 1994 "assault weapons" ban had never been implemented or even proposed, there would be far fewer military-style semiautomatic rifles than there are today.

[paulsby]

102. if?

lol.

it expired some time ago.

it never ceases to amaze me how people continually form opinions without even understanding the basics.

[ShortnFiery]

9. Simply Yes

Believe it or not, many people live rich and full lives without owning a firearm. The NRA talks as if gun ownership is as precious as "health care." :crazy:

Hey, I'm all for people who do not have profound depression or anxiety issues that are diagnosed to OWN and KEEP firearms. However, if anyone who is a gun owner finds them self slipping into hopelessness, then please, sign your gun over to a buddy to hold until you can get yourself better?

Obama is NOT going to take your guns away. Geeze!

However, as a person who survived the emotional aftermath of having a cousin killing himself with a hand gun, I wish to GOD that he didn't have such easy access. I believe if given time, he would have found his way out of the horrific demons that were causing him so much emotional pain.

If you know someone who's slipping, then please reach out to them? Also,if they own a gun, ASK for them to allow you (legally) to keep this weapon(s) for them until they are feeling better?

[paulsby]

103. many people lead rich lives without ever having to exercise

any # of rights, or relying on their protection.

those who are never arrested or formally accused of a crime need never execute their rights under the 5th amendment.

doesn't mean those aren't important rights.

[Doctor_J]

17. Why is there a question mark on the subject line?

of course hate radio provoked the nut.

[MercutioATC]

28. I don't think the media had much to do with it.

Even IF what set him off was the possibility that Obama would take away his guns, that's a pervasive concern for many gun owners.

Obama's own AG said that he wants to reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban...and that's not some right-wing wacko talking, it's the Attorney General of the United States.

[Doctor_J]

77. Then you're in a tiny minority

just like with your stance that every citizen should own an arsenal of military-grade weaponry.

[MercutioATC]

118. Existing laws already heavily restrict private ownership of "military-grade weaponry".

...and the people who believe that garbage legislation like the AWB should stay dead isn't a minority.


Why would you even suggest that I (or anybody else) supports private ownership of military hardware? The AR-15, the SKS, AK-47 clones.....none of these are functionally different than your average hunting rifle...and they certainly aren't "military-grade weaponry". They just look different.

[Mr. Hyde]

26. Is it possible that his hatred for cops fueled his rage against cops?

[TorchTheWitch]

51. Seems like he hated damn near everyone

Cops included.

[Mr. Hyde]

70. seems like he hated cops just a little bit more though. nt

[TorchTheWitch]

87. You said it

His biggest fear was having his guns taken away. Who ever he delusionally thought was going to do that would be at the top of his hate list. Which is pretty much why did this horrible crime. If it had been a group of neighbors or friends or family that he delusionally thought was going to take away his guns than it would have been those people at the top of his hate list that he would have gunned down.

[aikoaiko]

38. As I understand it, he was a domestic abuser who knew the police were coming .

Most domestic abusers give it up, but some won't be taken in. This happens from time to time ragardless of politic persuasion or radio listening habits.

[TorchTheWitch]

49. They weren't coming because of domestic abuse

They were called because he and his mother had had an arguement about the dog going to the bathroom on the floor and she wanted the police to remove him from her house because she didn't want him to live there anymore. At the time there was no abuse, she wasn't scared of him, he hadn't threatened her or anything like that. Though he had a history of violence and did apparently abuse his girlfriend, that's not why the police were coming. He was convinced they were going to take his guns away because he was a paranoid delisional nutter. His friends even said that he had stated that whenever someone like the police came to take away his precious guns there was going to be an altercation (read: over his dead body).

[SidDithers]

45. I believe it was a factor...

the guy was an avid fan of known loon Alex Jones.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/09095/960750-53.stm

Believing most media were covering up important events, Mr. Poplawski turned to a far-right conspiracy Web site run by Alex Jones, a self-described documentarian with roots going back to the extremist militia movement of the early 1990s.

Around the same time, he joined Florida-based Stormfront, which has long been a clearinghouse Web site for far-right groups. He posted photographs of his tattoo, an eagle spread across his chest.

"I was considering gettin' life runes on the outside of my calfs," he wrote. Life runes are a common symbol among white supremacists, notably followers of The National Alliance, a neo-Nazi group linked to an array of violent organizations.

"For some time now there has been a pretty good connection between being sucked into this conspiracy world and propagating violence," said Heidi Beirich, director of research at the Southern Poverty Law Center and an expert on political extremists. She called Mr. Poplawski's act, "a classic example of what happens when you start buying all this conspiracy stuff."

Sid

[kctim]

61. Then why didn't he do this while Bush was President?

Alex Jones was harder and more critical of Bush than most people even here at DU. In fact, many claimed Jones to be a fringe lefty during those years.

[Postman]

73. It may have to do with the shooter being a righwing crazy agreeing with

what Bush was doing.....

[Doctor_J]

76. Because hate radio was not advocating violence against Smirk

None of them complained ever about torture, domestic spying, illegal wiretapping, Free Speech Zones, the revocation of habeus corpus, political prosecution (Don Siegelman), or religious persecution of Muslins. But assault rifles - now there's a critical issue :crazy:

[kctim]

83. I mentioned Alex Jones

and your response shows you know nothing of him, as it does for the OP.

[MercutioATC]

79. Because Bush's AG didn't say he wanted to reinstate the AWB?

...just sayin'

[sinkingfeeling]

54. To answer the OP's question, "Yes, absolutely."

[bridgit]

59. I say yes! Even at their most lucid moments RW hate-media is never less than in touch...

with it's fringe-crazy side, it's the demographic of their format and they know it they play to it; it is that fringe-crazy that pays their mortgage. And they know that too; they also know how unstable, smack-talking and potentially violent they *all* are

[Vidar]

63. Of course it did.

[nycusa15]

81. I don't think so

I don't think so. That is pushing it

[baldguy]

90. When RW hate radio starts screaming "Look out! Obama will take your guns!"

and a short time after the shooter says "I'm afraid the gubmint will take my guns," I think the connection is irrefutable.

[kctim]

91. So

when the fundies start screaming "porn leads to rape" and a short time later I watch more porn, that means I am going to go out and rape?
Interesting. I better be more careful.

[baldguy]

92. Are you confessing to being a rapist?

[kctim]

114. No

but I own three porn movies and I don't want them to cause me to become a rapist.

[TorchTheWitch]

94. that analogy doesn't work at all

One that fits would be "OMG! Obama is going to take all the porn away!"

Now, what might a crazy nut who believed that and refuses to live without their porn possibly do?

[kctim]

115. Buy more porn, NOT become a rapist.

Maybe seeing people who own guns or porn as 'crazy nuts' is what prevents so many people from being rational.

[426HemiGuy]

95. Tragedy avoided

The truth often does not matter to a psychologically abnormal person only their perceptions. To bad this guy did not get the help he needed, a tragedy could have been avoided.

[jillan]

96. I think they are rousing emotions in people that may be emotionally unstable.

Unfortunately, I think this incident is a prime example of that.