Post: #76

(07-20-2012 06:49 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 06:43 PM)malc Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 09:32 AM)sheesh Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 08:37 AM)Moma Wrote:  Roosh is onto something there. How many mass murdering crimes are there in Holland?
Even cats with zero game can always pony up some Euros at the very worst and buy some pum pum.
Either buss a nut or buss a shot.

Au contraire... if prostitution is the only way to get sex, your sense of self worth will suffer just as much. It's releaving for a short moment but if it's the only way to be "accepted" by women, it will fuck you up.

Those incidents happen in Europe, too, especially in schools, just not that often.

No one is going to kill because he hasn't had sex in a while. It's because he get's rejected again and a again as a person by society and the other sex, of course. Sadly, making men feel as if they are the last scum seems to be womens' favorite sport in the western world.

As far as cheap, legal whores go, it's a good thing because it increases the amount of competition women have. Warlizard in his memoir talked about this effect while he was stationed in Germany. When guys have an option between paying $20 for a date or drinks or $20 for a safe good looking hooker, he's not going to be that enthusiastic about paying for the date. The women were a lot better in Germany as a result.

$20 is all a German hooker cost?? I can't imagine it's that cheap even in Thailand.

In Aruba, it's anywhere from $35-70. Mostly sexy Latina girls who have nothing going for them back home in Colombia or Venezuela.

Post: #77

(07-20-2012 03:44 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  Think about that... Drugs have been illegal forever with harsh penalties yet I could get any drug I wanted within 15 minutes. Why would it be any different with guns?

Can you score me some Beans?

Post: #78

(07-20-2012 07:01 PM)rakishness Wrote:  I'm surprised this stuff doesn't happen more often in America.

I am too. Especially in the workplace after what this recession has done to men. Just have to thank our lucky stars most guys keep it together and figure out another way.

One example I think of and I know it has to happen all over.

I worked in a cubicle job for about three years, before the recession wiped it out. Anyway, when I first started there was this older fella, late 50's, who just couldn't grasp what the company wanted its employees to do. He honestly tried and worked hard, but he was slow with results. Which, of course, should lead to his firing. But what he went through the last couple of months was a shameful disaster.

The main boss was a woman and three of the next four down were also women. They bounced the guy from different supervisor to different supervisor (each of the three), because all the women complained about him. One said he was staring at her chest in a meeting. Every guy knew it was bullshit, because this chick would have had to pay someone to merely glance at her sagging mess.

This of course made him an even bigger target and the wimmens were relentless. Making fun of everything about him. The guy had one leg shorter than the other (because he has something go wrong in childhood) and had to wear a right shoe with a three inch base. They would do this exaggerated walk to mock him. Ignoring the fact they were all wearing ridiculously high wedge shoes. You know, because if one bitch wears wedges they all do. I would just shake my head.

Could you imagine if any guys in the office would have done an exaggerated fat walk to mock a blimp. Hello HR.

He went through hell with all the snickers and absolute scorn and hate from these bitches. The guy would walk into the break room and every chick would scatter like someone said "free shoes at Nordstrom" I sat near him and would see chicks come by and make fun of the pictures of his family or anything else that wasn't deemed "celebrity gossip" cool when he was away from his desk.

Finally he was fired. Turns out he couldn't tell his wife right away
and she was the type who called him almost everyday at work. I would pick up his phone and say he wasn't there at the moment. But after a week, this turd in a blouse beat me to his phone and gleefully told his wife the news. Thencelebrated like she scored 10 free meals from the taco truck.

I knew he was a nice guy, but it was always in the back of mind for a while that, "shit this guy might come back here guns ablazing."

I realized he wasn't a great employee and he was a beta owned by his wife, but he was a genuinely decent guy and deserved a modicum of respect. Not the terrorizing he got, which I've only touched on for brevity sake.

Post: #79

deleted - redundant - too many people have already said what I was trying to say

Post: #80

(07-20-2012 05:07 PM)soup Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 04:56 PM)Samseau Wrote:  Two word solution: Death Penalty.

DP doesn't stop people from killing each other, so not really a solution.

But it would eliminate this crazy man's crazy genes from the gene pool.

Post: #81

This guy bought guns legally. The 2nd Amendment and court cases have settled that there is a right to own guns. Forget about gun control.

More about him: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/0...annel&lite

The guy was an almost archetypal beta male, with poor social skills. Shame he didn't know about game.

From the story:

Quote:"I always thought that he was a little strange. I could never put my finger on it, but something told me to not get to close to him, female instincts I guess," the female student told NBC News. "I had tons of classes with him and lived across from him in the Honors dorms. He was a very smart guy though. He was a little bit of a weird guy, but we were honors students, so weird people were kind of common."

Quote:A woman who said she knew him in high school told NBC News that Holmes was a good person, but oddly always rooted for the villains in superhero movies.

"He was a nice guy. Who very much wanted to be liked and wanted," the woman said. "He was a very, very smart guy. I honestly can not believe he could do this. I know, I know, everyone says that. But it is truly devastating to me.

"He did not have many friends for someone who wanted to be liked," she said. "He loved all the villains in superhero stuff, which I did point out as odd. Most people enjoy the hero!"

Quote:Her cousin, who knew Holmes and played soccer with him, offered this assessment by email: "Jimmy was kind to those who knew him. It was hard to get to know him, but once you did, you realized he was funny and accepting of everyone's faults. He loved video games. But I would say he did not like the shooting games. He preferred others, guitar hero. He was always quiet on the soccer field, but was committed to the team. Which is someone you want on your side even if they aren't the best. The last time I talked to Jimmy, he didn't really seem to be in a good place. But that was years ago. But nothing out of the ordinary, just you know the 20's trials and tribulations. What he did was horrible, but I will always know him as Jimmy Holmes, not this person he is being portrayed as. Just so devastating, maybe if I tried to keep in contact or something. Just hope and pray that the families that were involved know that everyone is thinking of them. I just am thinking of Jimmy also."

Post: #82

Dude probably has severe psychological problems, it's not like reading BANG and a few game blogs would cure the guy of his psychosis. I don't doubt he was a "beta" and lacked social skills, I would bet dude rarely if ever got laid, but these things may have been a byproduct of his psychological issues. Sure there are probably some guys with narcisistic and antisocial personality disorder that are very charming and do well with women, despite being a sociopath. However, I bet most guys who reach the point of being mass-murders are beyond being "saved by game." Their issues are so severe that learning new social skills and becoming good with women, aren't really a viable option.

Post: #83

(07-20-2012 06:49 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 06:43 PM)malc Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 09:32 AM)sheesh Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 08:37 AM)Moma Wrote:  Roosh is onto something there. How many mass murdering crimes are there in Holland?
Even cats with zero game can always pony up some Euros at the very worst and buy some pum pum.
Either buss a nut or buss a shot.

Au contraire... if prostitution is the only way to get sex, your sense of self worth will suffer just as much. It's releaving for a short moment but if it's the only way to be "accepted" by women, it will fuck you up.

Those incidents happen in Europe, too, especially in schools, just not that often.

No one is going to kill because he hasn't had sex in a while. It's because he get's rejected again and a again as a person by society and the other sex, of course. Sadly, making men feel as if they are the last scum seems to be womens' favorite sport in the western world.

As far as cheap, legal whores go, it's a good thing because it increases the amount of competition women have. Warlizard in his memoir talked about this effect while he was stationed in Germany. When guys have an option between paying $20 for a date or drinks or $20 for a safe good looking hooker, he's not going to be that enthusiastic about paying for the date. The women were a lot better in Germany as a result.

$20 is all a German hooker cost?? I can't imagine it's that cheap even in Thailand.

He was in germany during the 90s so the prices are about 15 years old. Quotes from the book:

"The best “bang for the buck” was the 3rd Floor.  Sex with a gorgeous Asian girl for a half an hour was about $35 or 50 DM (Deutschmarks – this was prior to the Euro). "

"It’s even more fun when the girl is German.  She knows the deal, knows you don’t need her to get laid and that a prettier girl with a better body is about 10 minutes away by taxi.  She also has a completely different view of sex and isn’t burdened by the American Puritan Ethic. So now, instead of holding sex over your head, she has to prove that she’s worthy in other ways, just like you have to do for her!  I’m not saying that there aren’t any stuck-up bitches in Germany.  Of course there are.  But on average, I think the relationships are healthier and more fun."

Post: #84

A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

Post: #85

(07-20-2012 09:25 PM)x2d4d Wrote:  A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

So are you suggesting that we walk around suited up in body armor and carry automatic weapons every time we leave the house? In a state like Colorado citizens can easily obtain guns, so your argument makes no sense to me.

Post: #86

Seems like the police did a good job in responding quickly, making sure this guy didn't do more damage and capturing him. They get a lot of criticism from cynics so they deserve credit when they do a good job as well. My prayers are with the families of those injured.

Post: #87

I noticed that you edited out your suspicion that he bought them illegally.

(07-20-2012 09:25 PM)x2d4d Wrote:  A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

I'm as big a gun advocate as any, but this doesn't pass the smell test at all. Lets think about this from a tactical perspective.

The location is a DARK theater, packed with people, with maybe 4 exits (2 main exits and 2 emergency exits by the screen.

The agressor is in FULL BODY ARMOR (with a gas mask), has 2 handguns, a shotgun, and an AR-15, and most likely a ton of ammo.

The room is filling with smoke because the agressor released smoke grenades/tear gas into the theater.

In a dark, smoke filled room, filled with people screaming, trampling people, and running for their lives, and only a few exits, you are saying that there would have been LESS deaths/injuries had several of the theatergoers, armed only with HANDGUNS, started shooting at where they THOUGHT he was (remember, it is dark, smoke filled, and he is dressed in black), DESPITE the fact that the room is filled with innocent bystanders?

No way. You want to see what it is like when people with handguns engage individuals IN BODY ARMOR with high capacity rifles? Look no further than the North Hollywood shootout. Keep in mind, that shootout occured with 2 assailents in body armor verses 50 trained police officers, outside in open space, in broad daylight, with the majority of the civilians gone. Even with those odds, it still lasted 44 fucking minutes.

I personally question whether anyone could have gotten a shot off in the initial shootout at the theater, much less dropped a man wearing full body armor, including a helmet. My suspicion is that, in all of the confusion, crowds, darkness and smoke, they would more than likely have hit a civilian. Had multiple people in the room been armed, I could VERY EASILY imagine them shooting each other, thinking that the other CCW holding good samaritan was the original shooter.

Any way you look at it, this was a bad scene. The number one goal of any good samaritan in this event in Colorado should be to get as many people out through the exits as possible.

Post: #88

I blame feminism. I would bet most of the beachfront real estate in California that if this guy had a good male influence in his life, he wouldn't have done this.

Post: #89

(07-20-2012 05:34 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 03:47 PM)Moma Wrote:  @speakeasy - So why aren't people shooting each other up in England on a mass scale? You can get guns illegally there too.

In that case it could just be a difference in culture. Some countries are just more criminal prone than others. That guy in Norway found a way to get a gun when he killed all those kids. Even in Europe, if people are determined to get a gun, they can find one.

This was tragic, that 20 people may die, but that many people die in car accidents in just one hour of every day in the United States. When something sensational happens, everyone expects the government to crack down on everything, rather than just accepting that every now and then, some nut is going to snap and kill people. It sucks, but keeping the numbers in perspective, more will be killed by lightening. It's the same thing with terrorism. I wish some leader will just stand up and say that instead of everyone running around like chickens with their heads cut off absolutely terrorized. I don't plan on going to the movies tonight, but if I were, I wouldn't be in the least bit worried. I'm more likely to get run over by a car on the walk there than shot up by a nut in the theater.

America is not more criminal prone than England, in particular. Humans are human. Americans have a higher sense of entitlement maybe than the British but there are a lot of English cats I know that wouldn't hesitate to do some criminal shyt.

The amount of stabbings I heard of in London, England was unbelievable. I knew a guy that used to roll around with a knife from his mum's kitchen hoping for cats to get froggy so he could perforate them. If he could access a gun, I'm sure he'd upgrade.

If you reduce the guns, less gun crimes would occur. People would still have criminal tendencies but then they would have to go through a lot more hoops to get guns.

If they went through all that JUST to get a gun, would they use such time endeavoured to avenge some nerd fuelled injustice i.e. blowing away hordes of people?

Post: #90

(07-20-2012 09:25 PM)x2d4d Wrote:  A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

In theory, this might not be wrong. The problem with this logic is when you apply it to reality: the other 364 days of the year, every little beef is going to end up with guns drawn. Every douchebag that fronts you in a bar is now going to have a gun behind the roid rage. Every bitch that instigates a confrontation in a club is going to do so in crowd of armed-ass dudes. Bitch might have a gun herself. Fewer people might die at once, but I'd venture to say--in aggregate--you're going to have a lot up shot-up-ass people. The deterrent argument just doesn't take real human nature into account. All of sudden, every little dude is going to go head up with big-ass dudes because the playing field is suddenly leveled. The court will be packed with "self-defense" cases.

If it'd been legal for me to carry, and use a gun, this whole time, do you know how many people would have been capped (or at least seriously threatened) by now? Dudes start beef with me all the time. I de-escalate first, until I can't do so without getting punked or endangering myself or my people. After that, it's whatever I got.

Not good logic.

Post: #91

Was the movie that bad to shoot people over?

Post: #92

(07-20-2012 10:13 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 09:25 PM)x2d4d Wrote:  A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

In theory, this might not be wrong. The problem with this logic is when you apply it to reality: the other 364 days of the year, every little beef is going to end up with guns drawn. Every douchebag that fronts you in a bar is now going to have a gun behind the roid rage. Every bitch that instigates a confrontation in a club is going to do so in crowd of armed-ass dudes. Bitch might have a gun herself. Fewer people might die at once, but I'd venture to say--in aggregate--you're going to have a lot up shot-up-ass people. The deterrent argument just doesn't take real human nature into account. All of sudden, every little dude is going to go head up with big-ass dudes because the playing field is suddenly leveled. The court will be packed with "self-defense" cases.

If it'd been legal for me to carry, and use a gun, this whole time, do you know how many people would have been capped (or at least seriously threatened) by now? Dudes start beef with me all the time. I de-escalate first, until I can't do so without getting punked or endangering myself or my people. After that, it's whatever I got.

Not good logic.

Same. I'm not too sure about a 'guns for all' policy. I feel comfortable hanging out with my friend the cop with a gun on when off duty and we're out but I sure as hell didn't feel comfortable being out at bar in Tennessee when a bunch of drunk 35 year old white women started showing me the guns they had in their purses...one snide remark about saggy tits or cat ladies and it could have been "eat, pray, die" in there.

Post: #93

This is a sad event and my thoughts go out to the people of Aurora. It's so senseless that grasping the utter madness of this lunatic is neigh on impossible. How anyone can commit to this act is inconceivable.

Post: #94

(07-20-2012 10:13 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

(07-20-2012 09:25 PM)x2d4d Wrote:  A shooting like this is a massacre because of gun control, not the lack of it. Had the theater been full of armed men ready to fight for their life and the lives of their loved ones, substantially fewer people would have been killed and injured. Not to say that, in aggregate, gun control isn't worth it, just that this was a sardines-in-a-barrel situation and the gunman was massively outnumbered. Fighting back would have been far and away the best option for survival if they'd had suitable weapons.

In theory, this might not be wrong. The problem with this logic is when you apply it to reality: the other 364 days of the year, every little beef is going to end up with guns drawn. Every douchebag that fronts you in a bar is now going to have a gun behind the roid rage. Every bitch that instigates a confrontation in a club is going to do so in crowd of armed-ass dudes. Bitch might have a gun herself. Fewer people might die at once, but I'd venture to say--in aggregate--you're going to have a lot up shot-up-ass people. The deterrent argument just doesn't take real human nature into account. All of sudden, every little dude is going to go head up with big-ass dudes because the playing field is suddenly leveled. The court will be packed with "self-defense" cases.

If it'd been legal for me to carry, and use a gun, this whole time, do you know how many people would have been capped (or at least seriously threatened) by now? Dudes start beef with me all the time. I de-escalate first, until I can't do so without getting punked or endangering myself or my people. After that, it's whatever I got.

Not good logic.

I think that people will be a lot more careful and respectful with their words and actions if it's common knowledge that people might be carrying concealed weapons with them.

Post: #95

(07-20-2012 11:26 PM)Enfant_Terrible Wrote:  I think that people will be a lot more careful and respectful with their words and actions if it's common knowledge that people might be carrying concealed weapons with them.

That's the myth, but you could argue the exact oppposite: I think people would get a lot bolder, more impatient, and ruder knowing they have a concealed gun on their waist to back them up.

This is what you'd get:

   

Post: #96

Well, it's nothing like that here Tuth where it's extremely easy to get a gun and license to carry it as long as you don't have felonies on your record. Most people won't just pull it out and start shooting because you're going away for a long time if your life wasn't threatened.

Post: #97

You can't really buy personal firearms in Mexico, and that place has like zero gun crime....

But seriously, we all just have to live with that fact that there's always going to be some small percentage of society that's gonna be "broken". This sort of thing is a big fucking circus because it doesn't happen very often, compared to other homocides, anyway.

The only thing we can really do about it to help those around us not to slip off the deep end. Roosh has probably done more good for the mental health of a bunch of young guys than most any therapist or Ritalin cocktail cocktail ever could.

Post: #98

Guns are not the problem here. If this guy did not have access to guns, he would have just firebombed the place with some Molotov cocktails, or thrown a mix of bleach/ammonia onto peoples faces, etc.

Post: #99

The killer is a fag

Post: #100

Or maybe it has something to do with all the prescription medication we take.....