Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Newtown leader condemns professor who suggested school massacre was 'drill'

Newtown leader condemns professor who suggested school massacre was 'drill'

5 posters

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Guest


Guest

James Tracy, an associate professor of media history at Florida Atlantic University, made the bizarre claim on his personal blog memoryholeblog.com, writing that the shooting that left 20 children and six adults dead may have been a government drill -- or may have not even occurred.

"It is outrageous and an insult to all caring people to think that this man would chose this event as a stage for his outlandish conspiracy theories," Newtown First Selectman E. Patricia Llodra told FoxNews.com, calling his statements "wrong, inconsiderate and insensitive."

Tracy, who did not return calls for comment, told the Sun-Sentinel he considers his conspiracy-mongering a scholarly endeavor


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/08/florida-professor-questions-newtown-shooting-massacre-calls-for-more/#ixzz2HRdJy9Ss

hmm. a professor of media history thinks this didnt happen at all. How interesting. what is a professor of media history?

Sal

Sal

Chrissy wrote:what is a professor of media history?

Newly unemployed.

no stress

no stress

I'd have to be very sure of myself before I made those statements

Guest


Guest

Sounds like a conspiracy nut.

Guest


Guest

I was intrested in what his profession was. Because I find that to be interesting for him to make those assumptions based on what?

He teaches journalism, communication and media history. He knows all the ins and outs of the media.

heres an ad for a job position for someone like him.

http://jobs.uoregon.edu/unclassified.php?id=3924

We are living in tyranny. I think at any given time if they needed a media frenzy to distract us they could do this with ease. Sometimes we dont look at things closly because we have already made up our mind. Thats what it is meant by a closed mind never learns anything.

I looked at tons of vids from this things. I know something isnt right. but what? this guy knows this stuff wayyyyyyyyyyyy better than me.

do you know they CREATED a ENTIRE school and went in and put every thing exactly like the other school, they said they even put the pencils in the same spot the kids had them in the old school. Do you not find that weird?

Sal

Sal

Chrissy wrote:I was intrested in what his profession was. Because I find that to be interesting for him to make those assumptions based on what?

He teaches journalism, communication and media history. He knows all the ins and outs of the media.

heres an ad for a job position for someone like him.

http://jobs.uoregon.edu/unclassified.php?id=3924

We are living in tyranny. I think at any given time if they needed a media frenzy to distract us they could do this with ease. Sometimes we dont look at things closly because we have already made up our mind. Thats what it is meant by a closed mind never learns anything.

I looked at tons of vids from this things. I know something isnt right. but what? this guy knows this stuff wayyyyyyyyyyyy better than me.

do you know they CREATED a ENTIRE school and went in and put every thing exactly like the other school, they said they even put the pencils in the same spot the kids had them in the old school. Do you not find that weird?


Put down the crack pipe and step slowly away from your keyboard.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
Chrissy wrote:I was intrested in what his profession was. Because I find that to be interesting for him to make those assumptions based on what?

He teaches journalism, communication and media history. He knows all the ins and outs of the media.

heres an ad for a job position for someone like him.

http://jobs.uoregon.edu/unclassified.php?id=3924

We are living in tyranny. I think at any given time if they needed a media frenzy to distract us they could do this with ease. Sometimes we dont look at things closly because we have already made up our mind. Thats what it is meant by a closed mind never learns anything.

I looked at tons of vids from this things. I know something isnt right. but what? this guy knows this stuff wayyyyyyyyyyyy better than me.

do you know they CREATED a ENTIRE school and went in and put every thing exactly like the other school, they said they even put the pencils in the same spot the kids had them in the old school. Do you not find that weird?


Put down the crack pipe and step slowly away from your keyboard.

Really, why dont you make an atempt to prove the conspiracy wrong instead of insulting? Dont you think that would at least be more interesting. I do

Sal

Sal

Chrissy wrote:
Really, why dont you make an atempt to prove the conspiracy wrong instead of insulting? Dont you think that would at least be more interesting. I do

If you don't want to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.

I'm not going to waste a second of my time attempting to disprove an insane delusion.

Guest


Guest

Sal wrote:
Chrissy wrote:
Really, why dont you make an atempt to prove the conspiracy wrong instead of insulting? Dont you think that would at least be more interesting. I do

If you don't want to be ridiculed, stop being ridiculous.

I'm not going to waste a second of my time attempting to disprove an insane delusion.

But you dont mind wasting a few seconds of your time insulting others who like to investigate stuff.

So basically youre just a useless troll. Rolling Eyes

Guest


Guest

Robert Shibley, an official with the Philadelphia-based Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, said Tracy is well within his rights of free speech, especially when teaching a course on conspiracy theory.

Read more: http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/national/prof-newtown-didnt-happen-crisis-actors-may-have-been-employed-by-the-obama-administration#ixzz2HZillHLm

Crisis actors:
http://crisisactors.org/

The duplicate school:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/sandy-hook-school-recreated-crayons-desk-building/story?id=18107267

Hospital Bob

Hospital Bob

There's two words which can explain this and every other government conspiracy. Dick Cheney.
He and his New World Order buddies blew up the world trade center and shot up the school.
And he's coming for you next.

Sal

Sal

The mind that could makeup or buy into an insane conspiracy theory that not only denies the tragedy, but also insults the victims and victim's families as frauds, is a particularly sick and twisted mind.

Nekochan

Nekochan

I don't believe in any kind of conspiracy stuff with this tragedy. I think a mentally ill young man went off the deep end. As some have said, this has been made into a gun issue, but what about the mental health aspect? You cannot lock someone up before they've committed a crime. The shooter should have been getting mental health care. The guns at his home should have been locked up. But you cannot force an adult in the USA to get help. You can't force an adult to stay on his/her meds. And if a family member has someone committed, they're going to be out in a few days. The only thing, I think, that the school or the school district could have done that would have stopped the murders on that day is if someone in that school was able to stop the shooter.

I do find it strange that they are trying to put everything in the new school the same as it was in the old school. Why? Is this what the mental health experts say should be done? I don't know, but it just seems like that having the same setup and placement of things would only bring the nightmare back to those poor kids.

Sal

Sal

Nekochan wrote:I don't believe in any kind of conspiracy stuff with this tragedy. I think a mentally ill young man went off the deep end. As some have said, this has been made into a gun issue, but what about the mental health aspect? You cannot lock someone up before they've committed a crime. The shooter should have been getting mental health care. The guns at his home should have been locked up. But you cannot force an adult in the USA to get help. You can't force an adult to stay on his/her meds. And if a family member has someone committed, they're going to be out in a few days. The only thing, I think, that the school or the school district could have done that would have stopped the murders on that day is if someone in that school was able to stop the shooter.

I do find it strange that they are trying to put everything in the new school the same as it was in the old school. Why? Is this what the mental health experts say should be done? I don't know, but it just seems like that having the same setup and placement of things would only bring the nightmare back to those poor kids.

Mental illness is a huge problem in this country, and like so many things solving it is all about the money.

When mental institutions were closed down in the 70s and 80s, group homes and mental health outreach programs were supposed to take their place. However, federal funding for those programs were slashed in the budget-cutting of the 1980s as well. States were supposed to pick up the slack, but in reality they didn't have the funding to do so.

Now we house our mentally ill in homeless shelters and prisons.

The equation is pretty simple. More mentally ill people on the streets plus more guns on the streets equals more gun massacres.

Nekochan

Nekochan

But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.

Guest


Guest

Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


Given his history of mental defect... I don't think it was legal for him to have access to firearms or for his mother to have taken him to a gun range and teach him how to shoot. Those laws were originated in the sixties.

Sal

Sal

Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


I was speaking generally, not about the Sandy Hook incident specifically.

Regarding the Sandy Hook shooter, he came from a fabulously well off family who could've afforded all the mental health services they needed.

The vast majority of people in this country are not in that position, and that's one problem.

When I say guns "on the street", I'm just referring to the 300 million privately held firearms. That's a lot of guns. And, it's really, really easy for a person with bad intentions to get their hands on one of those guns, be they mentally ill or not, and that's another problem.

Guest


Guest

Nekochan wrote:I don't believe in any kind of conspiracy stuff with this tragedy. I think a mentally ill young man went off the deep end. As some have said, this has been made into a gun issue, but what about the mental health aspect? You cannot lock someone up before they've committed a crime. The shooter should have been getting mental health care. The guns at his home should have been locked up. But you cannot force an adult in the USA to get help. You can't force an adult to stay on his/her meds. And if a family member has someone committed, they're going to be out in a few days. The only thing, I think, that the school or the school district could have done that would have stopped the murders on that day is if someone in that school was able to stop the shooter.

I do find it strange that they are trying to put everything in the new school the same as it was in the old school. Why? Is this what the mental health experts say should be done? I don't know, but it just seems like that having the same setup and placement of things would only bring the nightmare back to those poor kids.

VERY strange indeed. Too strange. I relaize questioning what they tell us on the nightly news makes me crazy. But Ive come to the conclusion that not questioning whats on the nightly news might just be as crazy.

Nekochan

Nekochan

OK, let's say that anyone in the USA could get easily get whatever mental health care they need for free or for a reasonable charge. Let's say that we had the best mental health care available to all who need it. But mental health isn't like a broken bone where most people who have one knows there is something wrong and they want to fix it and will go and get it set if they have the means to do so. Even in the best of mental health care circumstances, you cannot force someone to get help for their mental issues and/or take their medication before they've committed a crime.

Remember the story from a month or so ago about the cop who gave the homeless guy boots? A couple of weeks later, the guy was shoe-less again. Turns out that he actually has a place to live and some kind of government assistance. But he also obviously has mental issues. The government cannot make him wear shoes and if he was criminally inclined, the government's actions or laws couldn't stop him from killing people before he killed them.

Sal

Sal

Nekochan wrote:OK, let's say that anyone in the USA could get easily get whatever mental health care they need for free or for a reasonable charge. Let's say that we had the best mental health care available to all who need it. But mental health isn't like a broken bone where most people who have one knows there is something wrong and they want to fix it and will go and get it set if they have the means to do so. Even in the best of mental health care circumstances, you cannot force someone to get help for their mental issues and/or take their medication before they've committed a crime.

Remember the story from a month or so ago about the cop who gave the homeless guy boots? A couple of weeks later, the guy was shoe-less again. Turns out that he actually has a place to live and some kind of government assistance. But he also obviously has mental issues. The government cannot make him wear shoes and if he was criminally inclined, the government's actions or laws couldn't stop him from killing people before he killed them.

There are no magic solutions. We cannot let perfection be the enemy of progress.

People are getting killed and maimed by gun violence at an alarming rate in this country.

We have a mental health crisis in this country.

Gun violence and mental illness are problems that we will never completely solve, but we can alleviate with just a little common sense.

Provide better access and fully fund mental health services.

Do a better job of monitoring who is buying guns.

Restrict the sale of killing machines that have no purpose other than to shred human beings in large numbers quickly and efficiently.

Draconian mandatory sentences for crimes involving firearms.

Denial of the right to own firearms to anyone convicted of any violent crime, and stiff penalties for those who violate the law.



Last edited by Sal on 1/10/2013, 4:10 pm; edited 1 time in total

boards of FL

boards of FL

Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


Apply strict liability to gun ownership. If the mom knew she would be held equally liable for anything anyone else did with her guns, perhaps they would not have been as easily accessible by someone with mental problems.


_________________
I approve this message.

Nekochan

Nekochan

I agree with you about the sentencing part for gun crimes. I don't have a problem with gun registration. I am not necessarily against putting restrictions on certain types of guns. But I have read that the gun that was used in this school massacre was never on the banned weapons list and that it is a perfectly legal gun to buy and own in Conn., which already has some pretty strict gun laws.

There are too, too many guns out there to keep them out of the hands of the criminally insane and common criminals. I do not think it's physically possible to keep guns out of the hands of sick or evil people. I would like to keep guns out of the hands of some people but how do you do this when we have hundreds of millions of guns in the country?

Nekochan

Nekochan

boards of FL wrote:
Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


Apply strict liability to gun ownership. If the mom knew she would be held equally liable for anything anyone else did with her guns, perhaps they would not have been as easily accessible by someone with mental problems.

That mom paid the ultimate price...death.
I think you're on a slippery slope if you start charging law abiding gun owners for the crimes that other adults commit. If a gun owner actively and knowingly breaks a law, it's one thing. But what you're talking about is a dangerous idea. What if the guns were locked up? What if he somehow got the key, without his mom's knowledge? There are too many problems with this idea.



Last edited by Nekochan on 1/10/2013, 2:53 pm; edited 1 time in total

boards of FL

boards of FL

Nekochan wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


Apply strict liability to gun ownership. If the mom knew she would be held equally liable for anything anyone else did with her guns, perhaps they would not have been as easily accessible by someone with mental problems.

That mom paid the ultimate price...death.
I think you're on a slippery slope if you start charging law abiding gun owners for the crimes that other adults commit. If a gun owner actively and knowingly breaks a law, it's one thing. But what you're talking about is a dangerous idea.

I'd rather the danger be internalized with those who choose to own bushmasters than exist as an externality on those who attend elementary school.


_________________
I approve this message.

Nekochan

Nekochan

boards of FL wrote:
Nekochan wrote:
boards of FL wrote:
Nekochan wrote:But Sal, the guns in this case weren't "on the street". They were legally purchased. They were in the young man's home. There is nothing that the government could have done to stop this young man from getting the guns and taking them to the school---short of some serious infringements of his and his mother's rights.


Apply strict liability to gun ownership. If the mom knew she would be held equally liable for anything anyone else did with her guns, perhaps they would not have been as easily accessible by someone with mental problems.

That mom paid the ultimate price...death.
I think you're on a slippery slope if you start charging law abiding gun owners for the crimes that other adults commit. If a gun owner actively and knowingly breaks a law, it's one thing. But what you're talking about is a dangerous idea.

I'd rather the danger be internalized with those who choose to own bushmasters than exist as an externality on those who attend elementary school.

Only Bushmasters?
What you are suggesting is dangerous territory. And besides that, I do not think it would have stopped these murders.

What if an 18 year old takes a knife from his parents' home and kills with it? Are you going to hold the parents responsible?

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 3]

Go to page : 1, 2, 3  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » General Discussion » Newtown leader condemns professor who suggested school massacre was 'drill'

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum