The reds flags are so many they block out the sun.....LOL

Starting with the media the red flags just keep on coming.

Many news sources..........

We can't discuss Adam Lanza, you'll just go off the deep end again.

Elliot Rodger commited suicide, he'd hoped someone would do it for him but that didn't work out so he did it himself.

His misplaced rage is why he took others with him.

RedS, 

Elliot refused to take his meds. Especially Risperdol. He googled it. His agenda was to reflect a lasting act that would satisfy his idea of him being the Alpha/god. He only understood appearances as valid information, and thought that was the only way responsible for obtaining results.

Intimacy in its true form produces what he outwardly saw, and yearned for. But he only wanted the actions of sex and the results. He never wanted what it took to get there. 

Me....:D......LOL

Moons,

You are just wrong. You really did skim too fast. Elliot purposely chose his dates to avoid the inevitablity of the cops arrival. He had his own death planned by his own hands, ideally with a gun in each hand, squeezed off simultaneously. That was his godly decision.

You can mention Adam Lanza whenever you want. Time heals, yes it does.

He wanted his rage once he discovered it. Hard to make a case for it being misplaced, then.

Bee,

if your using his manifesto as a basis for your opinions that's your first and biggest mistake.

Producing shabby media opinions are second.

Misplaced certainly, he blamed everyone except those who were actually responsible including himself.

To suggest we give up even more of our rights will not change such events.

I'm certain he knew the cops would be on him as soon as the first shot rang out and he drove in a way that he knew they'd have him quickly.

I don't think he was stupid or diminished.

His Godly decision?

It's getting embarrasing.

Well, of course I am using the horse's mouth as source. There is no better for such a profile as I have attempted. That you again try to minimize my impressions is not worth commenting on by me. I just ignore it, as your flaw.

I don't think he was stupid at all, why would you think that? You must pay closer attention to distinctions. He certainly had other diminished areas in his psyche. You shouldn't want to always make an attack on me, and you might clear your thinking to get the points I am making.

He never took any responsibility for his miserableness on anything, that I agree is true.

Here is an opinion that has me thinking. It was brought to my attention by someone else. June 6, 2014

How Covering up Minority Crime Leads to Gun Control

By Selwyn Duke
 

Commenting recently on the Elliot Rodger killings, arch-leftist Michael Moore wrote that while “other countries have more violent pasts…more guns per capita in their homes…and the kids in most other countries watch the same violent movies and play the same violent video games that our kids play, no one even comes close to killing as many of its own citizens on a daily basis as we do….” From a man who used to take the simple-minded gun-control position “fewer guns = less homicide,” it was surprising evidence of growth. After making his point, however, Moore made a mistake in following up with, “and yet we don't seem to want to ask ourselves this simple question: "Why us? What is it about US?” It’s not, however, that we don’t want to ask the question.

It’s that we don’t want to hear the answer.

We can begin seeking it by asking another question: Why is it that Vermont, with approximately the same rate of gun ownership as Louisiana, has less than one-eighth the murder rate? Even more strikingly, why does New Hampshire have both a far higher gun ownership rate and a lower murder rate than England, Piers Morgan’s favorite poster-boy nation for gun control?

Professor Thomas Sowell provided more of these seeming contradictions in 2012, writing:

When it comes to the rate of gun ownership, that is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the murder rate is higher in urban areas. The rate of gun ownership is higher among whites than among blacks, but the murder rate is higher among blacks.

… [There are also] countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States, such as Russia, Brazil and Mexico. All of these countries have higher murder rates than the United States.

You could compare other sets of countries and get similar results. Gun ownership has been three times as high in Switzerland as in Germany, but the Swiss have had lower murder rates. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership and low murder rates include Israel, New Zealand, and Finland.

So what’s the answer we don’t want to hear? The critical difference among these regions and nations is explained right in Sowell’s title: it’s “not guns.”

“It's people.”

What “people” differences are relevant? Let’s start with race and ethnicity. In the cases of homicide in 2012 in which the races of the perpetrators were known, 55 percent were committed by blacks, 62 percent of whom were under 30 years of age. Black youths are 16 percent of the youth population, but constitute 52 percent of those arrested for juvenile violent crime.

 

  The statistics for Hispanics are more difficult to ferret out because, unbeknownst to many, law enforcement agencies tend to lump them in with whites in crime statistics (the FBI has announced that it will finally categorize Hispanic crime — in its report on 2013). However, there is some information available. Examiner’s Ken LaRive tells us that “Hispanics commit three times more violent crimes than whites,” but that the disparity could be even greater because of their often being classified as white.

The National Youth Gang Survey Analysis reports that gang members are approximately 49 percent Hispanic, 35 percent black and 10 percent white. And while whites are 35 percent of NYC’s population, blacks and Hispanics commit96 percent of all crime in the Big Apple and 98 percent of all gun crime.

Another good indicator is international crime statistics. Hispanic countriesdominate the homicide-rate rankings, with Honduras topping the list with a rate eight times as high as that of our worst state, Louisiana. Also note that there are no European/European descent nations in the top 20 and not one Western-tradition nation in the top 30 (Russia and Moldova are 24 and 28, respectively).

And what can we say about these “people” differences? It’s much as with the question of why men are more likely to be drunkards than women. You could explore whether the differences were attributable to nature, nurture or both. But it would be silly to wonder if the answer lay in men having greater access to bars, alcohol or shot glasses.

This brings us to why covering up minority criminality encourages gun control:

Americans won’t understand that the critical factor is people differences if they aren’t told about the people differences.

They will then — especially since most citizens aren’t even aware that there are nations with more firearms but less murder — be much more likely to blame guns. Of course, this is precisely what you want if you’re a left-wing media propagandist.

There is a question that could now be posed by the other side: if the main difference in criminality is demographics, why not outlaw guns? After all, it won’t make a difference one way or the other, right? I’ll offer a couple of answers to this question.

First, for a people to maintain just liberties, a freedom must always be considered innocent until proven guilty; the burden of proof is not on those who would retain it, but on those who would take it away.

Second, while private gun ownership and just law enforcement can’t turn barbarians into civilized people any more than excellent schools can transform dunces into geniuses, they can act as mitigating factors that minimize criminality as much as possible given the “raw material” with which the particular society has to work. It’s much as how you can maximize your personal safety: you may be safer in a great neighborhood with no martial arts training than in a terrible one with that training. Nonetheless, it allows you to be safer than you would be otherwise whatever neighborhood you choose.

And what do the stats show in our fair to middling USA neighborhood? Florida State University criminologist Gary Kleck reported that guns are used by good citizens 2.2 to 2.5 million times per year to deter crime. That likely saves many more innocent lives than are lost in massacres every year, but these unseen non-victims don’t make headlines the way Sandy Hook tragedies do. That’s why I like to say, using a twist on a Frédéric Bastiat line, a bad social analyst observes only what can be seen. A good social analyst observes what can be seen — and what must be foreseen.

Lastly, one more truth becomes evident upon recognizing that demographics are the main factor in criminality: even if you do believe in gun control, imposing it federally and applying a one-size fits all standard is ridiculous. In terms of people and crime, there’s a world of difference between towns in New Hampshire or Vermont, with their England-level murder rates, and cities such as East St. Louis, IL, or Detroit, which rival El Salvador in citizen lethality. You can make gun control the same everywhere, but you can’t change the fact that people will be very, very different.

 

http://americanthinker.com/2014/06/how_covering_up_minority_crime_leads_to_gun_control.html