Multiple victims in Michigan church shooting; church on fire

[Hazelelponi]

This just doesn't seem like a politically based killing. There just isnt the political rhetoric surrounding the Mormons.

So I certainly wonder what was going on.

Seems this Mormom shooter was nuts in some respect. He reportedly had been living with the deceased body of his family member for a week prior to the attack, if what I read was accurate. That alone tells you this guy was gone mentally.

The only thing that makes me wonder if there's a connection is this guy reportedly had no connection to the religious community in question, had to drive to even get there.

Plus Charlie Kirk's assassin came out of a Mormom home, though he wasn't following in his parents more conservative footsteps.

It's the above that makes you wonder and think it could still be due to political nonsense and all the rhetoric. I don't think those struggling with mental illness can handle the language. We have been saying that for a long long time - years now

However, police seem to indicate the deceased family member might provide more insight into motivation, so it could be something else entirely as we learn more.

But I can't help but think it's still more about the those mentally struggling in this environment of verbal diarrhea. Going and shooting up the the worship hall of any group was unheard of 20 years ago, now it's not as shocking, they aren't the first lately - the environment has changed that much.

When the environment is difficult for even perfectly sane people, those with real mental challenges are going to be breaking at some point.

The language in and of itself is a stress. We can daily watch some prominent democrati call us all Nazis and fascists even after Charlie's death, they didn't ratchet down. The are still claiming ICE is the "gestapo" etc. It's not normal or sane in the first place, and it's not taking us to positive places no matter what way you slice it.

 

[Bradskii]

When the environment is difficult for even perfectly sane people, those with real mental challenges are going to be breaking.

Then let's crank that rhetoric back. It can only help. I suggest that we start at the top and let it filter down to the grass roots. It won't work any other way.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Then let's crank that rhetoric back. It can only help. I suggest that we start at the top and let it filter down to the grass roots. It won't work any other way.

Craziness directed your way will be defended against yes?

It's not about the right reacting - it's normal human nature to react. It's that all reaction would end if the catalyst ends.

Keep the catalyst going and it's out of the hands of those on the right to keep the anger to a minimum and or directed more positively. At some point we can't control the reaction anymore than you can on your side. The language is that of war, and human nature is predicable. This didn't start yesterday.

 

[Servus]

In that time, in no order, you had the following:

Slavery
The Civil War
The Trail of Tears
The Indian Wars
The Mountain Meadows Massacre
Phillipine-American war
Overthrow of the Hawaiian Government
The various Reconstruction-era massacres of freed slaves.
Tulsa Race Riots

To name just a few.



Rose-tinted [redacted]

Those children ingrained with "a sense of objective moral values, individual responsibility, respect for others, law and order, and eventual judgement before God" grew up to commit theft, violence and murder at much higher rates than we do today.

What are the statistics for crime, unwed pregnancy, unwanted pregnancy, divorce, single parents, drug addiction, homicide, suicide, homelessness etc per capita per decade? My guess is it's increased. Much higher in 2025 compared to 1925.

 

[Gene2memE]

What are the statistics for crime, unwed pregnancy, unwanted pregnancy, divorce, single parents, drug addiction, homicide, suicide, homelessness etc per capita per decade? My guess is it's increased. Much higher in 2025 compared to 1925.

Homicide is roughly 1/3rd lower than 1925. Down from about 9-10 per capita to 6-7 per capita.

I'd recommend reading The Better Angeles of Our Nature, specifically chapters 3 and 4. Pinker has to use various proxies as statistical surveys are generally spotty until post WW2, but his general conclusion is that violence in general and homicide in particular has been vastly reduced in the last few centuries among Western democracies.

As for the others, you can look them up if you've got the motivation. But, comprehensive data is hard to get beyond about 75 years ago (and even then, methodologies change skewing results wildly).

 

[Servus]

Homicide is roughly 1/3rd lower than 1925. Down from about 9-10 per capita to 6-7 per capita.

I'd recommend reading The Better Angeles of Our Nature, specifically chapters 3 and 4. Pinker has to use various proxies as statistical surveys are generally spotty until post WW2, but his general conclusion is that violence in general and homicide in particular has been vastly reduced in the last few centuries among Western democracies.

As for the others, you can look them up if you've got the motivation. But, comprehensive data is hard to get beyond about 75 years ago (and even then, methodologies change skewing results wildly).

I think we both know all of it has gotten worse over time.

 

[Larniavc]

Is this coincidence?

Yes.

 

[Tuur]

He supposed that his era produced a more moral society than future more secular eras. He didnt know either way, of course.

No. He supposed that religious instruction produced a more moral society. He made no comparison to other eras. He may well have drawn from personal experience: he noted in his autobiography how he noted failings in himself and others after becoming, in his words, "a thorough deist." I don't think he brought that up with Paine, but while Franklin remained a deist, he urged religious instruction. All of which is considered anathema in our secular society.

And of course, since his time, we've decided - as noted in the bill of rights - that its not the state's place to be advancing this or that religious understanding. And back then it was just competing versions of Christianity that were, to put it mildly, problematic. Now we'd have to throw Islam and Buddhism and whatever else into the curriculum. Best for the state to step back and let this be a personal matter.

The Bill of Rights addressed only the Federal government, and ended with the 10th which stated anything left up in the air was left to the states. It wasn't until the Reconstruction period and the 14th or 15th Amendments (caffeine hasn't kicked in) , and then the 20th Century when these two amendments were used to extend Congress to state and local governments.

The point of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment was to prevent an official Church of the United States of America, like there was an official Church of England. This didn't prevent congress from granting relief on bibles imported by a US bible society, must likely because the bibles could be used by any Christian denomination and didn't promote one at the expense of others. It also didn't prevent church services in US Federal buildings. Jefferson attended one service the Sunday after penning his "wall of separation" letter to Danbury Baptists. All this wouldn't become verboten until ruled as such in the 20th Century.

 

[DaisyDay]

Statistically, it is likely to be another religion hating liberal.

Where are you getting your statistics?

 

[iluvatar5150]

I think we both know all of it has gotten worse over time.

No, we don’t. Society is markedly less violent than it was even 100 years ago.

 

[DaisyDay]

The political right are not Nazis and fascists, but call people that long enough and killing will occur.

While it's certainly true that most of the political right are not Nazis and fascists, some are. Those who will kill over being labeled are themselves to blame, not the labelers.

 

[Servus]

No, we don’t. Society is markedly less violent than it was even 100 years ago.

Not in America in general. You know how it goes. There was a time when people felt safer. As kids in the 60s and 70s we were all over the place and our parents didn't worry unless we didn't get back home at by a certain time. And if we didn't they worried that we got into a accident. As a kid going all over the place the only threat I faced was running into that other kid who bullied me. My childhood neighborhood has devolved considerably since then. And I'd feel leery walking around it these days as a grown man in broad daylight.

 

[Larniavc]

But this doesn't seem to fit political violence.

Why ever not? America is replete with political violence. It’s an outlier among developed nations.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Why ever not? America is replete with political violence. It’s an outlier among developed nations.

And we aren't giving up on the guns so next topic. It's our check and balance against tyranny, thank you.

After half the country has been demonized and othered and those mentally unstable invited to start assassinating our side over unpopular opinions and politicians act like escapees from the local mental health lockdown facility rather than adult men and women ready to lead this whole country, people are not even going to be enticed to deal on this topic.

Why don't we discuss what is of real concern. The mental health crisis. Maybe we can work harder to try and actually provide real help to those in need

 

[iluvatar5150]

Not in America in general. You know how it goes. There was a time when people felt safer. As kids in the 60s and 70s we were all over the place and our parents didn't worry unless we didn't get back home at by a certain time. And if we didn't they worried that we got into a accident. As a kid going all over the place the only threat I faced was running into that other kid who bullied me. My childhood neighborhood has devolved considerably since then. And I'd feel leery walking around it these days as a grown man in broad daylight.

Yes, in America in general. Your perception of being safer has virtually zero bearing on how safe you actually are. It's largely a function of your media diet and what you've been made aware of. Murder rates in the US doubled over the course of the 1960's and stayed at that peak for 20 years until starting their sharp decline in the early 90's.

That your one neighborhood has devolved is not representative of the nation as a whole. Many neighborhoods have gone the opposite direction - take large swaths of NYC, for example.

 

[iluvatar5150]

It's our check and balance against tyranny, thank you.

lol, sure it is.

 

[DaisyDay]

Why does that matter? Can you name a single mass school shooting prior to Columbine? Obviously, the pattern shows that the further a nation becomes more secular, human life has less value.

I remember the Texas A&M tower shooting back in the 60s. I was just a kid then but it had been reported that a couple who had been polite to the shooter in the elevator were not shot. Whether that was true or not, I have no way of knowing, but it impressed on me to be polite to strangers (or else).

 

[Servus]

Yes, in America in general. Your perception of being safer has virtually zero bearing on how safe you actually are. It's largely a function of your media diet and what you've been made aware of. Murder rates in the US doubled over the course of the 1960's and stayed at that peak for 20 years until starting their sharp decline in the early 90's.

That your one neighborhood has devolved is not representative of the nation as a whole. Many neighborhoods have gone the opposite direction - take large swaths of NYC, for example.

Funny how this thread and many others like it are about mass murderers taking place to the point where we've become desensitized to most of them. And I listed several out of many areas of increasing degradation. But I know recognition of overall deterioration breaks the illustion progressive liberalism. That's why there's always a steadfast denial of increasing crime and immortality, and the need for a nationwide revival.

 

[iluvatar5150]

But I know recognition of overall deterioration breaks the illustion progressive liberalism. That's why there's always a steadfast denial of increasing crime and immortality, and the need for a nationwide revival.

Ah yes, it's we who are steadfastly denying things and not you and your side who can provide absolutely zero evidence to support your point aside from your own, completely subjective, feelings. It's we, with our piles of data, who are living in a fantasy world and not you, with your entire perspective based solely on what the screen in front of you tells you.

Your nostalgia is nothing but a pat answer to a problem that your camp doesn't understand and for which it has developed no real answer.

 

[Desk trauma]

Why don't we discuss what is of real concern. The mental health crisis.

Why? That’s not going to be addressed either, it’s just another distraction.