ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 20th September 2019, 03:38 PM   #161
CaptainHowdy
Graduate Poster
 
CaptainHowdy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,314
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
**



There are conflicting accounts:
Quote:
Wilson was expelled from McAlester High after being caught with a knife and a swastika at school multiple times. An affidavit obtained by NBC News says that she experienced bullying when she attended the school, and was unable to reenroll.
Holy Moly! She had a knife and a swastika at school! More than once! If she had only had a knife, it mightve been OK. But a swastika too!
CaptainHowdy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 03:50 PM   #162
Myriad
Hyperthetical
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 15,680
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
Holy Moly! She had a knife and a swastika at school! More than once! If she had only had a knife, it mightve been OK. But a swastika too!

A sharpened steel throwing swastika can do a lot of damage. Especially when thrown left-handed.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 07:59 PM   #163
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
Is it still Felony Hoax?
I'm not sure what you're asking. Do you mean, is that the appropriate crime to charge her with? I don't know; I haven't read the statutes. But if nothing else, she should IMO spend some time in a psychiatric hospital.
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 08:09 PM   #164
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 46,270
Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy View Post
Holy Moly! She had a knife and a swastika at school! More than once! If she had only had a knife, it mightve been OK. But a swastika too!
Yeah, wearing a swastika is something really mentally stable people do....
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 08:10 PM   #165
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 46,270
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I'm not sure what you're asking. Do you mean, is that the appropriate crime to charge her with? I don't know; I haven't read the statutes. But if nothing else, she should IMO spend some time in a psychiatric hospital.
Uh, the terms "Felony" and "Misdemenor" are used as an expression ie;"THat was Felony Stupid" to mean that was really stupid.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 08:38 PM   #166
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
"Bypass security"? Do you think this was some kind of federal building or courthouse?

Just a little over a year ago, I had to pick up a niece from a modern high school. "Security" is a sign on the door saying all visitors must report to the office first.
Intriguing. To wit: a little over a year ago, I had a couple kids in public high school. Although we are not in what you'd exactly call a war zone ($600,000+ average home value in my beloved beach town), you cannot enter the school without being electronically observed and buzzed in after speaking with the receptionist about your business there over intercom. SROs and armed police presence during the actual school day. And at graduation, there were over a dozen armed cops present in different locations.

What do we make of this, Checkmite? Oh, I know. It doesn't ******* matter what my kid's school or your niece's school had for security. It matters what Wilson's school has. I wonder why you didn't figure that out on your own? Perhaps you have the straight dope on security at MacAlester High? Oh, do tell, Checkmite! Do tell! That would be all kinds of relevant!

Quote:
A brief look at the Wikipedia article for the Parkland shooting demonstrates why it is utterly absurd to think a terroristic act of this type necessarily requires a "deeply calculated plan to get to the scene with a weapon and bypass security":



Did Cruz have a "deeply calculated plan"? No; he just picked up his rifle - carried in a rifle case - and had Uber drop him off at the school, and strolled right in and started shooting.
Looks like the 'deeply calculated plan' reference went over your head, too. Three posters right before me had referenced deep planning: "I don't know how much deeper into planning you could get", "deep in the planning stages", "deep into planning it". You see, Checkmite, when a phrase gets used frequently in a thread, other posters might employ the same phrase in order to...

Nah. I'll get carded if I have to keep explaining this to you.

Quote:
So no, you're wrong; "step one" is not a Home Alone montage where the would-be shooter dramatically unrolls a schematic of the school building onto a table under a hanging lamp and starts technically analyzing approach points and lines of fire. In fact I feel confident saying that, historically, absolutely no school shooter is known to have created plans of that nature. Demanding such a plan from this person as evidence of her sincerity is demanding something absolutely unprecedented among school shooters; and for law enforcement to require such before taking the threat seriously would constitute ignoring the fairly well-established pattern of such incidents.
A) cheap strawman on the kickoff
B) you have already been reminded of Columbine, and
C) you have no freaking idea how much planning went through any school shooter's head.

To really drag this down to grade school level: the police said Wilson was in the "advanced stages" of planning the attack. Posters here spoke of her "deep planning" as well. An astute poster would see the appallingly obvious, that I was riding that to make a point about how little planning was reported to have been actually made. Few exits here, a date there.. But not you, Checkmite. Not you.

Although tbh, I have enjoyed this little game of ours, this flirty cat pawing betwixt us. But I am a married man, Checkmite. My wife, you see, keeps me covered under her work health insurance and stuff. I hope you understand.

Should our stars cross again, one day on some lonely thread, I call tops. I know, I know, but it ain't some macho thing. We wouldn't ask Sandy Koufax to try his hand behind the plate, would we?

Adieu, mon cheri. Adieu
Thermal XOXO
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 11:31 PM   #167
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,127
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Always interesting to see a female mass killer, though many of them do turn out to be lesbian, possibly transgender.

Whether she was serious or not will be interesting. In one of her photos she is wearing a t-shirt with "The Anarchist Cookbook" written across it.
Do you have a cite for the highlighted?
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th September 2019, 11:43 PM   #168
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Intriguing. To wit: a little over a year ago, I had a couple kids in public high school. Although we are not in what you'd exactly call a war zone ($600,000+ average home value in my beloved beach town), you cannot enter the school without being electronically observed and buzzed in after speaking with the receptionist about your business there over intercom. SROs and armed police presence during the actual school day. And at graduation, there were over a dozen armed cops present in different locations.

What do we make of this, Checkmite? Oh, I know. It doesn't ******* matter what my kid's school or your niece's school had for security. It matters what Wilson's school has. I wonder why you didn't figure that out on your own? Perhaps you have the straight dope on security at MacAlester High? Oh, do tell, Checkmite! Do tell! That would be all kinds of relevant!
Well, since you insist.

Firstly we have the Student/Parent handbook, which, on the subject of visitors, says simply:

Quote:
All visitors, including parents, to any of the school buildings are required to report to the office and be issued a visitor’s badge. For safety purposes, building access must be controlled. School age visitors are not permitted.
It's on page 20, by the way.

There's no mention of any special access procedures or any specially restricted times or points of ingress. The security at this building sounds just like that at my niece's school - except even less, because my niece's school apparently (if I'm remembering right) requires both staff and students to wear an ID badge clipped to their clothing and visible at all times, while no such procedure can be found in the student handbook for this school (I looked, but feel free to). Based on this, I would feel it safe to say special procedures like needing to be "buzzed in" do not exist at the school.

But, I feel that some others would not agree that's safe to say based purely on the absence of any mention in the student handbook. So, I did a YouTube search. This fantastically-convenient student-made video taken at the very self-same school in question, and posted earlier this very year besides, shows more than one entrance of the school which students are absolutely free to enter and exit without any restriction whatsoever. In fact, quite interestingly, in the middle of the school day students are evidently allowed to freely exit the building and re-enter it via other exterior doors, as this is apparently the most efficient route between certain classes during change of class-periods. The point of the last segment of the video, indeed, is to demonstrate exactly this fact for new students (rather hilariously, the subject at one point stops to fill his water bottle at the hallway fountain, as if anticipating and preemptively debunking this excuse for being late).

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


The combination of the student handbook and the above-linked video rather vividly illustrates the physical security at this school does not require "buzzing in" (there doesn't seem to be any provision for an intercom system on the exterior of any of the shown entrances). Internal security appears to be provided by plainclothes hall monitors; while there's almost certainly an SRO present, they don't seem to be actively patrolling the building or monitoring the entrances during the school day, based upon the evidence we have.


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
To really drag this down to grade school level: the police said Wilson was in the "advanced stages" of planning the attack. Posters here spoke of her "deep planning" as well. An astute poster would see the appallingly obvious, that I was riding that to make a point about how little planning was reported to have been actually made. Few exits here, a date there..
Is this not sufficient? She had not merely come up with a date, and considered the density of students and possible exists - she had bought a weapon and ammunition, and had begun warning multiple people about her intentions. As I said, it's not much as far as plans go, but it's more than most school shooters are presently known to have planned. And indeed, the poster you have quoted anonymously was correct - I'm not sure how much "deeper" planning was required, or could even have been done in this case. At one point you talked about "necessary steps", and tried to imply this person had not, in your opinion, even reached "step one" yet. On the contrary; I won't try to guess definitely how many official "steps" there are to planning something like this, but based on the known facts so far there was nothing whatsoever left for this person to plan or prepare. Nothing left to do at all, in fact, but carry out the attack on the already-decided day and time.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 20th September 2019 at 11:44 PM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 07:21 AM   #169
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 6,323
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
So what solution do you propose?

For example, what do you propose be done to restrict the rights of people when there's not enough evidence to do so?
I propose the solution that has already happened. When people make credible and specific threats like that, they should be investigated and/or arrested.

When there's not enough evidence to do so, then there's nothing the authorities can do. That's when we all just hope we're not in the wrong place at the wrong time when one of these nutters goes off.

But in the case of this brown-eyed girl, there was plenty of evidence warranting law enforcement intervention (in my opinion - possibly not in yours?).
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 09:12 PM   #170
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Well, since you insist.

Firstly we have the Student/Parent handbook, which, on the subject of visitors, says simply:



It's on page 20, by the way.

There's no mention of any special access procedures or any specially restricted times or points of ingress. The security at this building sounds just like that at my niece's school - except even less, because my niece's school apparently (if I'm remembering right) requires both staff and students to wear an ID badge clipped to their clothing and visible at all times, while no such procedure can be found in the student handbook for this school (I looked, but feel free to). Based on this, I would feel it safe to say special procedures like needing to be "buzzed in" do not exist at the school.

But, I feel that some others would not agree that's safe to say based purely on the absence of any mention in the student handbook. So, I did a YouTube search. This fantastically-convenient student-made video taken at the very self-same school in question, and posted earlier this very year besides, shows more than one entrance of the school which students are absolutely free to enter and exit without any restriction whatsoever. In fact, quite interestingly, in the middle of the school day students are evidently allowed to freely exit the building and re-enter it via other exterior doors, as this is apparently the most efficient route between certain classes during change of class-periods. The point of the last segment of the video, indeed, is to demonstrate exactly this fact for new students (rather hilariously, the subject at one point stops to fill his water bottle at the hallway fountain, as if anticipating and preemptively debunking this excuse for being late).

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE


The combination of the student handbook and the above-linked video rather vividly illustrates the physical security at this school does not require "buzzing in" (there doesn't seem to be any provision for an intercom system on the exterior of any of the shown entrances). Internal security appears to be provided by plainclothes hall monitors; while there's almost certainly an SRO present, they don't seem to be actively patrolling the building or monitoring the entrances during the school day, based upon the evidence we have.
Gotta hand it to you, you went out of your way to present this red herring. Participation medal warranted, but unfortunately no Gold Star.

I checked my daughter's old high school handbook and guess what Checkmite? Come on come on come on guess guess guess! Not a single word about the buzzer I had six years of familiarity with (for all my Thermalspawn to cycle through). Not a word about the exterior electronic surveillance either, nor a peep about the SROs or freaking armed city police which are there each and every day! The student handbook you so proudly present as evidence amounts to precisely a steaming pile of ****.

Then you offer a scripted video about tardiness to class, implying that this somehow holds clues to the security protocols at MacAlester High. It does not. It is scripted under a very different intent.

So, all in, you proved nothing about nothing. I sincerely hope you didn't spend too many minutes of your precious time above ground putting that together. Twas for naught.

Funniest part: we are not discussing buzzing-in procedures. You offered an anecdote. and I countered with an opposing anecdote. But -and here's the rub- neither had anything to do with the security at a graduation. You know, what the OK police say was her target in her meticulously deep and advanced planning? She allegedly targeted a graduation, which surely you could figure out has nothing to do with whether or not you buzz in.

Wait: you do understand that people don't buzz in individually to a graduation, right? It's normally an outdoor affair, on the bleachers. Sometimes indoors, if the gymnasium can accommodate the crowd. I feel confident saying never are individual attendees buzzed in.

Btw, I take it you didn't notice that, unlike you, I included observations about my kid's high schools actual graduation security. You know, the actual topic that yo were trying to misdirect away from. Even my nephew's outdoor graduation abt 4 years ago in Western Bumblefook had armed cops everywhere. Your reliance on buzzers is an excessively weak red herring. We are talking about graduation security. So do tell, Checkmite. Do tell about the ******* relevant graduation security!

Quote:
Is this not sufficient?
No, it ain't jack ****.

Quote:
She had not merely come up with a date, and considered the density of students and possible exists
...which is the jack-all squat she is alleged to have deeply planned in the advanced stages...

Quote:
- she had bought a weapon and ammunition
...not remotely uncommon for an 18 yr old who was a marksman and hunter for years...

Quote:
...and had begun warning multiple people about her intentions.
...a coworker or two and a mysterious text recipient. Or something...

Quote:
As I said, it's not much as far as plans go, but it's more than most school shooters are presently known to have planned. And indeed, the poster you have quoted anonymously was correct - I'm not sure how much "deeper" planning was required, or could even have been done in this case. At one point you talked about "necessary steps", and tried to imply this person had not, in your opinion, even reached "step one" yet. On the contrary; I won't try to guess definitely how many official "steps" there are to planning something like this, but based on the known facts so far there was nothing whatsoever left for this person to plan or prepare. Nothing left to do at all, in fact, but carry out the attack on the already-decided day and time.
Ok, time to corral you back on topic, there, cowboy. My point was that the OK police and posters here on these hallowed fora have spoken about her being in the "advanced stages' of "deep planning". My observation is that she hadn't planned for ****, if reporting is to be believed.

Consider, if you will, my planning for defecation:

1. I identify the nearest convenient rest facility
2. I determine it's state of occupancy
3. upon entry, I verify soap and towel availability, and check for poo-pourri or matches
4. I verify adequate paper on the roll, and sufficient reserve rolls should current roll seem low.
5. Confirm cel phone proximity to reply to Checkmite posts

See, I have deeper planning to move my ******* bowels than this chick was alleged to have for a mass shooting.

The point, you ask? Posters here and law enforcement seem all too eager to find Wilson guilty. To the point of exaggerating the significance of evidence. Pittsburg county's finest said she had a graduation date, something about an area of limited exits, and...here's the show stopper...a "like" for a Columbine documentary. Hey, If I facebooked, I might "like" a well-made documentary. Means less than zero, but the 5-0 acts like that is significant. Tells me the popo has a whole lot less than they suggest. I mean, that's supposed to be damning? Why talk about something so insignificant? Unless you got nothing better to hold up.

Bottom line: Wilson, with her anime-brown eyes and legs for days or whatever, has a proven history of being all talk, and nothing more. Threatens to kill someone...with a fork? Brings a knife to school and...does nothing with it? Buys an AK-47 (surely this is the slam-dunk )...and poses with it and shows pics and invites coworkers over to plink with her.

My take: just a wannabe bad bitch. No teeth to back it up. I had a more violent rap sheet by 18 and I wasn't hurting a fly.

And I think that is something to consider while everyone is sharpening the pitchforks.

eta: only recently noticed I posted last night. found an expensive coconut porter that has recently become the object of my affection. Tourists gone, and I am enjoying the honeymoon stage with the local LEOs before they get bored out of their minds by winter and go all nazi. They tolerate my **** for now.

eta2: dude dude dude: I swear I am not kidding, the wording on my kids school handbook is identical to McAlester, and...get this...is also on page 20. But I can't prove the buzz in procedure or the cops will give me a hard time over why I am prowling around the school at night taking pics All red squiggly lines gone except for McAlester

Last edited by Thermal; 21st September 2019 at 09:55 PM. Reason: in drunken stupor and left misspelled but obvious bad word
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 10:21 PM   #171
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,384
Originally Posted by EHocking View Post
Do you have a cite for the highlighted?
Of course not. It's utter BS.
__________________
Your grandchildren will be brown, trans, and Islamo-Communist.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 11:10 PM   #172
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 3,359
Originally Posted by EHocking View Post
Do you have a cite for the highlighted?
Not at the moment.

But if you look at some of the literature it's a striking observation.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 11:35 PM   #173
Lambchops
Graduate Poster
 
Lambchops's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Norvegr
Posts: 1,384
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Not at the moment.

But if you look at some of the literature it's a striking observation.
What literature?
__________________
Your grandchildren will be brown, trans, and Islamo-Communist.
Lambchops is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st September 2019, 11:57 PM   #174
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 3,359
Originally Posted by Lambchops View Post
What literature?
Some of the articles about these cases.

I'm not saying anything other than a sizable chunk of them, of the few female rampage killers there are, appear to fit this profile. It would make some sense, if the idea that male narcissism and rage is the root of these types of acts is true. Not including terrorism and wartime violence of course.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 12:11 AM   #175
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Then you offer a scripted video about tardiness to class, implying that this somehow holds clues to the security protocols at MacAlester High. It does not. It is scripted under a very different intent.
You are simply - obstinately, but simply - wrong. The video does offer all of the information that is necessary.

If it is a fact, as demonstrated in the video, that students are free to enter and exit the building exterior doors completely unrestricted while moving from class to class during the school day, then there simply cannot be a locked-door-and-buzzer-system in effect at the same time, if you're talking about the iteration of the school that exists in this universe. Neither can a buzzer-and-intercom protocol physically exist, much less be enacted, when there are visibly no intercoms installed at the doors.

That the video is scripted makes no difference. It's an educational video, intended to directly demonstrate to new students by example how to move about the building. If students moving between classes had to be buzzed in when reentering the building, this video would have shown that, because it is vital and on-topic information for the video.


Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Funniest part: we are not discussing buzzing-in procedures. You offered an anecdote. and I countered with an opposing anecdote. But -and here's the rub- neither had anything to do with the security at a graduation. You know, what the OK police say was her target in her meticulously deep and advanced planning? She allegedly targeted a graduation, which surely you could figure out has nothing to do with whether or not you buzz in.
What on earth are you talking about? All of that information was a direct response to YOUR specific request. You said:

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
What do we make of this, Checkmite? Oh, I know. It doesn't ******* matter what my kid's school or your niece's school had for security. It matters what Wilson's school has. I wonder why you didn't figure that out on your own? Perhaps you have the straight dope on security at MacAlester High? Oh, do tell, Checkmite! Do tell! That would be all kinds of relevant!
You asked for information about security at her former school, very plainly and straightforwardly, with no qualifiers. You pointedly described such information as "all kinds of relevant". That was YOUR request, however patronizing, and I have very kindly fulfilled it, in good faith and without complaint. I'm not sure what your problem is now, that you're now so clamorously objecting that this information isn't specific enough and, contrary to your very own previous words, has actually no relevance whatsoever, because it doesn't address a detail that you did not even mention once in your demand.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Wait: you do understand that people don't buzz in individually to a graduation, right? It's normally an outdoor affair, on the bleachers. Sometimes indoors, if the gymnasium can accommodate the crowd. I feel confident saying never are individual attendees buzzed in.
Last year's graduation of this specific high school was videotaped, and that video is also available on YouTube. The video indicates that the graduation takes place in the school's gymnasium. It is rather small school, and the entire crowd is easily accommodated. Would you like me to post that video as well? I feel like if I do so unsolicited it will upset or offend you or something even more.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
, I take it you didn't notice that, unlike you, I included observations about my kid's high schools actual graduation security. You know, the actual topic that yo were trying to misdirect away from. Even my nephew's outdoor graduation abt 4 years ago in Western Bumblefook had armed cops everywhere. Your reliance on buzzers is an excessively weak red herring. We are talking about graduation security. So do tell, Checkmite. Do tell about the ******* relevant graduation security!
The video of the graduation at this event shows between two and four police officers, in typical police uniform and in various states of physical fitness. Two stand near the gymnasium doors while the graduates enter. Two are later shown helping to move some speaker equipment during a portion of the event; they may actually be the same two, due to the quality of the video it's difficult to know for sure.

But if you're already willing to concede that there are no "buzz-in" procedures during the graduation, then I'm not sure what other information is particularly necessary; access to the graduation venue is thus as easy as walking in. Perhaps a ticket may "technically" be needed, but obviously the shooter will not be concerned with such formalities. More or less as a rule, school shooters anticipate the presence of at least some police, and certainly the arrival of many more during their attack. Those eventualities don't dissuade them; most of them have been prepared to die after engaging police responders, some having actually committed suicide when police failed to kill them as expected.

I have seen neither: 1) any evidence that the girl who was arrested for plotting this mass shooting was unaware of or did not take these facts into consideration, nor 2) any explanation - weak or strong, good or bad - for how a lack of written "proof" of such consideration is supposed to indicate a lack of seriousness about the attack on her part.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 22nd September 2019 at 12:14 AM.
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 03:15 AM   #176
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,929
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
So what solution do you propose?

For example, what do you propose be done to restrict the rights of people when there's not enough evidence to do so?
In Oklahoma, which is where Wilson is from, it is clear what can be done.

https://law.justia.com/codes/oklahom...ction-21-1378/
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 07:26 AM   #177
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
In Oklahoma, which is where Wilson is from, it is clear what can be done.

https://law.justia.com/codes/oklahom...ction-21-1378/
Conviction under those would seem to indicate that there was sufficient evidence, no?

The first says attempting or doing the act, up to 10 years.
The second says threatening to do the act, up to six months.
The third says devising a plan, scheme, or plan of action to do the act, up to ten years.

Wilson is said to have the graduation date and something about an area of few exits on her phone. And of course, 'liking' a documentary about Columbine. I'm not sure that actually constitutes devising a plan or scheme.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 09:08 AM   #178
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
You are simply - obstinately, but simply - wrong. The video does offer all of the information that is necessary.

If it is a fact, as demonstrated in the video, that students are free to enter and exit the building exterior doors completely unrestricted while moving from class to class during the school day, then there simply cannot be a locked-door-and-buzzer-system in effect at the same time, if you're talking about the iteration of the school that exists in this universe. Neither can a buzzer-and-intercom protocol physically exist, much less be enacted, when there are visibly no intercoms installed at the doors.

That the video is scripted makes no difference. It's an educational video, intended to directly demonstrate to new students by example how to move about the building. If students moving between classes had to be buzzed in when reentering the building, this video would have shown that, because it is vital and on-topic information for the video.
I really can't believe you need this explained to you. SHE WAS NOT SAID TO BE GOIING THERE DURING REGULAR CLASS TIMES. SHE WAS SAID TO BE GOING DURING GRADUATION, WHEN EVERY ONE OF THOSE OTHER DOORS WOULD BE CLOSED AND LOCKED. IT IS IRRELEVANT.

Regarding intercoms, there is typically only one at the main door, which your video does not seem to show. I really, really don't believe any of this has to be so repeatedly explained to you.

Quote:
What on earth are you talking about? All of that information was a direct response to YOUR specific request. You said:



You asked for information about security at her former school, very plainly and straightforwardly, with no qualifiers. You pointedly described such information as "all kinds of relevant". That was YOUR request, however patronizing, and I have very kindly fulfilled it, in good faith and without complaint. I'm not sure what your problem is now, that you're now so clamorously objecting that this information isn't specific enough and, contrary to your very own previous words, has actually no relevance whatsoever, because it doesn't address a detail that you did not even mention once in your demand.
Apologies. I'll make a mental note that rhetorical questions posed must include a half page of clarifications. I rather thought you could figure out that I meant "relevant' on your own.

Quote:
Last year's graduation of this specific high school was videotaped, and that video is also available on YouTube. The video indicates that the graduation takes place in the school's gymnasium. It is rather small school, and the entire crowd is easily accommodated. Would you like me to post that video as well? I feel like if I do so unsolicited it will upset or offend you or something even more.



The video of the graduation at this event shows between two and four police officers, in typical police uniform and in various states of physical fitness. Two stand near the gymnasium doors while the graduates enter. Two are later shown helping to move some speaker equipment during a portion of the event; they may actually be the same two, due to the quality of the video it's difficult to know for sure.
So now you think this new alleged vid shows us comprehensive security protocols in place? Outstanding! This must be a comprehensive study, yes? The definitive work on the subject of graduation security at McAlester is....drum roll...what you happen to catch glimpses of in the background of a vid? Well, I eagerly await your evidence demonstrating that what you see is the sum total of security. I really can't believe we are having this discussion.

Quote:
But if you're already willing to concede that there are no "buzz-in" procedures during the graduation,...
I am not 'already willing to concede' it. I had to point it out to you, who was clearly oblivious to its irrelevance.

Quote:
...then I'm not sure what other information is particularly necessary; access to the graduation venue is thus as easy as walking in. Perhaps a ticket may "technically" be needed, but obviously the shooter will not be concerned with such formalities. More or less as a rule, school shooters anticipate the presence of at least some police, and certainly the arrival of many more during their attack. Those eventualities don't dissuade them; most of them have been prepared to die after engaging police responders, some having actually committed suicide when police failed to kill them as expected.
Try to picture this. It's summer in Oklahoma. Not trench coat weather. It's going to be awfully difficult for her to get that rifle from her starting point to the inside of that gymnasium or auditorium.

Has it occurred to you that there might be additional police outside, in excellent position to note our dewey eyed murderess wandering around with an AK-47? Your tardiness video and handbook are stunningly irrelevant to these basic planning facts.

Quote:
I have seen neither: 1) any evidence that the girl who was arrested for plotting this mass shooting was unaware of or did not take these facts into consideration, nor 2) any explanation - weak or strong, good or bad - for how a lack of written "proof" of such consideration is supposed to indicate a lack of seriousness about the attack on her part.
Then you should pay more attention to the discussion and less than red herring documentation

1) just a reminder, she wasn't arrested for plotting anything. She was arrested and initially charged with threats. That's a stellar example of misrepresenting the facts to suit your chosen narrative, though.

But you're right: we don't know if she did or didn't take all this into consideration...because no plan at all is evidenced despite the police claiming she was in the advanced stages, and posters here thinking she was deep into planning. Whatever she did or didn't plan, it is virtually unknown.

2) no one claims that lack of written proof constitutes anything. I opined that something not intended for others, like a map, would be very convincing evidence that she was actually planning something.

Yet again, you betray a willingness to project planning on her, when virtually nothing is in evidence. There may be something to this meticulous caper (before you object with 'no planning is needed", I ask you to consider why you are not objecting to the police's characterization of 'advanced stages'. I mean, that's just silly, right? Are you suggesting the police are misleading the public, claiming advanced stages where none even exist?), but charging her with felony planning does not seem supported on the available evidence. It may be suggestive, but that's as far as it goes.

Last edited by Thermal; 22nd September 2019 at 09:23 AM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 10:06 AM   #179
autumn1971
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,070
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
So what solution do you propose?

For example, what do you propose be done to restrict the rights of people when there's not enough evidence to do so?
In this case I would say there was enough evidence to restrict one’s rights pending the investigation. In the US this would necessitate an arrest or an involuntary institutionalization of some kind.

After investigating, the person would then be responsible for either increased charges, or the lesser charge that allowed arrest would be pursued or not.

I’m not sure what the initial charge should have been, but I do think that detaining her was warranted. If a charge that better fit the initial suspected crime was available then that probably should have been used.
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 11:39 AM   #180
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Try to picture this. It's summer in Oklahoma. Not trench coat weather. It's going to be awfully difficult for her to get that rifle from her starting point to the inside of that gymnasium or auditorium.
How "difficult"? All she has to do is carry the weapon from the car to the door. She may do so openly; she may do so by carrying the weapon in a bag, making it non-obvious until she produces it for use. You are inflating the importance of this "phase" of an intended school shooting that, historically speaking, just has never posed an actual major operational hurdle for school shooters.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Has it occurred to you that there might be additional police outside, in excellent position to note our dewey eyed murderess wandering around with an AK-47? Your tardiness video and handbook are stunningly irrelevant to these basic planning facts.
Sure it occurred to me. Did it occur to her? Maybe. Perhaps, having attended this school for an unknown number of years before being expelled, she was personally familiar with the extent of security at this school's graduation event, attending at some point as a spectator, family member, or setup volunteer. Perhaps, like most school shooters seem to have, she did not care one whit about security, believing her trusty School-Shooter Special would clear a path for her when the time came, or that she would improvise on the spot if she met too much resistance. Or perhaps she completely failed to consider this aspect at all, and you are absolutely right that she would have been successfully stopped by the police, and we'd all be reading about this in the papers as a failed school shooting, stopped by the heroic police.

What I'm still waiting for YOU to explain, is why any of this matters. Your argument seems to be that if she did not correctly and wisely plan to address the security issue as part of her plans, and/or that portion of her planning didn't ever make it out of her head and into some kind of persistent record, that somehow proves that her school shooting plot was never serious, or that she wasn't "really" planning anything at all. But that's preposterous. No shooter really shows any evidence of having considered or even cared about what security was present at the time of their rampage. Whether you want to accept it or not, "I will take my gun to this place and this time and try to kill as many people as I can, and if I run into any trouble I'll just wing it" does constitute a plan. Indeed, history shows it seems to be the stock school-shooting plan.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
1) just a reminder, she wasn't arrested for plotting anything. She was arrested and initially charged with threats. That's a stellar example of misrepresenting the facts to suit your chosen narrative, though.
She was arrested and initially charged with threats. That charge was upgraded when police found evidence of actual planning on her part while investigating the threats.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
But you're right: we don't know if she did or didn't take all this into consideration...because no plan at all is evidenced despite the police claiming she was in the advanced stages, and posters here thinking she was deep into planning. Whatever she did or didn't plan, it is virtually unknown.
She had just acquired the weapon, and ammunition. She had picked out a precise date, time, and location. She had considered some operational details, such as number of exits. She had an easily-identifiable motive. She had expressed all of these details to others. And she had begun warning people about the attack. That demonstrates that she had progressed well beyond simple I'm-so-tough-talk and into an actual plot.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yet again, you betray a willingness to project planning on her, when virtually nothing is in evidence. There may be something to this meticulous caper (before you object with 'no planning is needed", I ask you to consider why you are not objecting to the police's characterization of 'advanced stages'. I mean, that's just silly, right? Are you suggesting the police are misleading the public, claiming advanced stages where none even exist?), but charging her with felony planning does not seem supported on the available evidence. It may be suggestive, but that's as far as it goes.
I think it is quite well-supported. We will see whether a judge who sees the evidence directly rather than as described by news articles agrees with you, or with the rest of us.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 02:51 PM   #181
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
How "difficult"? All she has to do is carry the weapon from the car to the door. She may do so openly; she may do so by carrying the weapon in a bag, making it non-obvious until she produces it for use.
Apologies if this point has been made - but wouldn't a graduation gown offer a fair amount of cover for smuggling in an AK?

As far as I can tell, she did enough planning to warrant the charge against her. It's now in the hands of the criminal justice system which is, IMO, where it should be, pending a psychiatric evaluation.

I'll bet she's already has a fan club out there who think her first and second amendment rights have been trampled on and are poised to rush in and support her morally and financially. Maybe that will give her the recognition she craves and will mitigate any homicidal inclinations.
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 03:09 PM   #182
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,929
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
How "difficult"? All she has to do is carry the weapon from the car to the door. She may do so openly; she may do so by carrying the weapon in a bag, making it non-obvious until she produces it for use.
Just like Nikolas Cruz did.

Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
You are inflating the importance of this "phase" of an intended school shooting that, historically speaking, just has never posed an actual major operational hurdle for school shooters.
...and it certainly didn't for Nikolas Cruz.


Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Sure it occurred to me. Did it occur to her? Maybe. Perhaps, having attended this school for an unknown number of years before being expelled, she was personally familiar with the extent of security
Just like Nikolas Cruz was.

Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Perhaps, like most school shooters seem to have, she did not care one whit about security, believing her trusty School-Shooter Special would clear a path for her when the time came, or that she would improvise on the spot if she met too much resistance.
Again, just like Nikolas Cruz.



[Checkmite: I hope you don't mind but I've rewritten the following part of your post to present it as a list]


Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post

1. She had just acquired the weapon, and ammunition.

2. She had picked out a precise date, time, and location.

3. She had considered some operational details, such as number of exits.

4. She had an easily-identifiable motive.

5. She had expressed all of these details to others.

6. She had begun warning people about the attack.

That demonstrates that she had progressed well beyond simple I'm-so-tough-talk and into an actual plot.
I wonder how many more items Thermal would need to add to that checklist before he/she would take Ms Wilson's threats seriously?
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 03:13 PM   #183
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,929
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I'll bet she's already has a fan club out there who think her first and second amendment rights have been trampled on

Out there!? Looks like she's got a 1A/2A fan club right here.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 04:05 PM   #184
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,210
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Out there!? Looks like she's got a 1A/2A fan club right here.
I meant, big enough to matter
Minoosh is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 05:22 PM   #185
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Apologies if this point has been made - but wouldn't a graduation gown offer a fair amount of cover for smuggling in an AK?
It certainly might; but I don't know how likely it is she would've considered this. She had been out of school for some time at this point. Plus, you've usually got to get your gown from the school itself. Heck, my own school didn't even actually issue gowns to students or special-order them; they had a supply which they lent strictly on graduation night and had to be returned at the end, and that's it.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 05:58 PM   #186
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,468
In 1963, a guy with no plan and having made no credible threat brought a gun with him to his place of work and shot the president.

But somehow, a student is not going to be able to shoot others at a school?

A lot of people say Oswald couldn't have shot JFK because carrying out something so big could not have been done so simply. In contrast, I contend that is the only way it could be done. You start making it complicated, and things unravel.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 06:00 PM   #187
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Just like Nikolas Cruz did.
Adam Lanza notably strolled up to Sandy Hook Elementary school with an unconcealed AR-type weapon (among other holstered guns) and nobody even noticed him until he started shooting out the door windows.

Last year's shooting at Santa Fe High School had a student entering a detached part of the school with a shotgun and a pistol - again, no method of concealment of these weapons was ever reported.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 09:19 PM   #188
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
How "difficult"? All she has to do is carry the weapon from the car to the door. She may do so openly; she may do so by carrying the weapon in a bag, making it non-obvious until she produces it for use. You are inflating the importance of this "phase" of an intended school shooting that, historically speaking, just has never posed an actual major operational hurdle for school shooters.
You are missing it yet again. Other shooters have walked up during normal hours. There are no special security provisions in place. Wilson is alleged to have picked a graduation ceremony, where virtually the entire school is closed, except for the heavily secured graduation area. Why do I say heavily secured? Because at my kids' school, there were at least a dozen I could see, far more than on an ordinary day. I assume police treat this as a potential shooting gallery in other districts, too. If you believe otherwise, the floor is yours.

Quote:
Sure it occurred to me. Did it occur to her? Maybe. Perhaps, having attended this school for an unknown number of years before being expelled, she was personally familiar with the extent of security at this school's graduation event,...
Lemme just stop you right there: she was expelled in her freshman year. There is nothing unknown about hot many years she attended. It was less than one.

Quote:
...attending at some point as a spectator, family member, or setup volunteer.
Really? You think a student recently expelled for bringing a knife to school and displaying swastikas would be welcomed as a helper in the school? How forward thinking of you.

Quote:
What I'm still waiting for YOU to explain, is why any of this matters. Your argument seems to be that if she did not correctly and wisely plan to address the security issue as part of her plans, and/or that portion of her planning didn't ever make it out of her head and into some kind of persistent record, that somehow proves that her school shooting plot was never serious, or that she wasn't "really" planning anything at all.
Tell you what, home boy. Let's have you backtrack a little and see if you can figure out what my argument actually is. I'm bored with treating you like an idiot. Please describe what you think my argument is, again. You can even cheat and backtrack the thread.

Quote:
She was arrested and initially charged with threats.
Yeah, that's what I said. You said that she was arrested for plotting. Remember?

Quote:
That charge was upgraded when police found evidence of actual planning on her part while investigating the threats.
Yeah, we know. Discussed at length. You're just figuring that out now?

Quote:
She had just acquired the weapon, and ammunition.
As discussed, not remotely unusual for a hunter and marksman in the States.

Quote:
She had picked out a precise date, time, and location.
Hold up. This is getting under my skin.

Do you have a citation for Wilson picking out a time? I don't think you do. I think you are lying.

So the floor is yours, with multiple options:

a) cite a time that Wilson picked. Not 'It seems she meant x o'clock". A ******* quote with the ******* time.
b) show a time she quoted that you might have reasonably confused it with
c) acknowledge that you lied, or
d) snip it out/go crickets, acknowledging that you lied and have no integrity either

The floor is yours, Checkmite.

Quote:
She had considered some operational details, such as number of exits.
Yeah. I consider where the door to the bathroom is, too. Real shrewd planning, that.

Quote:
She had an easily-identifiable motive.
The same motive as millions of others.

Quote:
She had expressed all of these details to others.
Dead lie. Or you could show where she cited some specific time? For that matter, what was the context of these oh-so-vague texts you rely so heavily on? Oh, what's that you say? You have not the foggiest idea what these texts say, aside from a vague cop's paraphrasing? Huh. You sure do seem to extrapolate a lot...considering you have no idea what they actually say.

Quote:
And she had begun warning people about the attack.
Damn. Another lie. Saying she wants to kill like 400 people for fun is not remotely saying that she plans to carry out a mass murder on a specific time (really, really can't wait to see your citation for the time).

Quote:
I think it is quite well-supported. We will see whether a judge who sees the evidence directly rather than as described by news articles agrees with you, or with the rest of us.
And there it is. I say that the evidence as presented is insufficient to pass judgment. You 'and the rest of us' have dropped the gavel without knowing exactly what it is. Couldn't have put it better myself, thanks.

Last edited by Thermal; 22nd September 2019 at 09:23 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 09:29 PM   #189
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Just like Nikolas Cruz did.



...and it certainly didn't for Nikolas Cruz.




Just like Nikolas Cruz was.



Again, just like Nikolas Cruz.
You seem too have a pretty low opinion of Americans, who presumably learned from the mistakes that happened with Nicolas Cruz.


Quote:

[Checkmite: I hope you don't mind but I've rewritten the following part of your post to present it as a list]




I wonder how many more items Thermal would need to add to that checklist before he/she would take Ms Wilson's threats seriously?
i see you also support the claim that doe eyed Alexis cited a specific time? Great. The same challenge to cite it is offered to you. The range from citing the time and I eat humble pie, to you are a cowardly liar. I await your citation, or victory crickets.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 09:36 PM   #190
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Out there!? Looks like she's got a 1A/2A fan club right here.
Who would that be? My argument is that the evidence is too loose to pin planning on her. Threats, she is nailed on. Possibly not realistic threats, but that's a sign o' the times. You can't say things like 'bomb' at the airport, either.

Last edited by Thermal; 22nd September 2019 at 09:44 PM.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 09:39 PM   #191
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
Apologies if this point has been made - but wouldn't a graduation gown offer a fair amount of cover for smuggling in an AK?
I can come up with a half a dozen low-tech scenarios for getting a gun into a graduation while pouring coffee. It's not complicated. But the argument here is whether she actually made any plans at all, or are posters projecting a narrative on her.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 11:04 PM   #192
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 24,511
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Tell you what, home boy. Let's have you backtrack a little and see if you can figure out what my argument actually is. I'm bored with treating you like an idiot. Please describe what you think my argument is, again.
Your argument seems to be that if she did not correctly and wisely plan to address the security issue as part of her plans, and/or that portion of her planning didn't ever make it out of her head and into some kind of persistent record, that somehow proves that her school shooting plot was never serious, or that she wasn't "really" planning anything at all.

If that's not what your argument "actually" is, then maybe you need to put in some effort to communicate it in a more straightforward manner, rather than relying on innuendo and snark. You are the one in control of how your message is delivered.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, that's what I said. You said that she was arrested for plotting. Remember?
I think this is semantic hand-wringing. She remains in custody charged with plotting the shooting she had been arrested for threatening.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah, we know. Discussed at length. You're just figuring that out now?
Many of your objections are nitpicks and addressing them in most cases requires reciting the basic facts of the case.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
As discussed, not remotely unusual for a hunter and marksman in the States.
I would certainly hope that people in the United States aren't hunting with AK-47's.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Hold up. This is getting under my skin.

Do you have a citation for Wilson picking out a time? I don't think you do. I think you are lying.

So the floor is yours, with multiple options:

a) cite a time that Wilson picked. Not 'It seems she meant x o'clock". A ******* quote with the ******* time.
b) show a time she quoted that you might have reasonably confused it with
c) acknowledge that you lied, or
d) snip it out/go crickets, acknowledging that you lied and have no integrity either

The floor is yours, Checkmite.
You have already conceded that her plot involved the graduation ceremony. That is a specific event, which by very definition has 1) a specific date, 2) a specific time, and 3) a specific location all inextricably attached to it. By invoking the event as the target, she was necessarily naming a time as well as a date and a place. You can understand this, right? If she went to the venue, but at some time other than when the event is scheduled to take place, the graduation ceremony would not be in progress when she arrived, and thus she would not be attacking the graduation ceremony.

This is frankly a bizarre exception on your part, given that your entire frenetic dismissal of my earlier information about the normal day-to-day state of security at the high school was based on your stressing the detail that she wasn't planning to attack during the regular school day, but rather during a special event at which time the security situation can be expected to be different from the norm.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Yeah. I consider where the door to the bathroom is, too. Real shrewd planning, that.
Then your objection has shifted from denial that any plan existed at all, to that it wasn't a particularly impressive plan? How "good" and "thorough" or even how "reasonable" the plan was doesn't really matter that much.

Anissa Weier and Morgan Geyser planned to escape deep into the woods and live with Slender Man for the rest of their lives after killing their friend as tribute. It's completely silly, childish, fantastical even; but it was a real and serious plan and their victim barely survived.

If Wilson didn't spend much thought on how she would deal with security, or unwisely chose to target an event that carried a high police presence, this demonstrates nothing but a lack of sophistication on her part - hardly surprising, as a certain impulsiveness and lack of maturity seems to be a universal trait among mass shooters. It does not by any means suggest that she was not serious about attacking the school/event, or that she "didn't really have a plan", or that her assault would not have been deadly.

The employee who spoke up after her threats is a hero, and has likely saved untold numbers of lives.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
The same motive as millions of others.
What sets her apart is showing an intent and positive steps toward enacting the plan.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Dead lie. Or you could show where she cited some specific time? For that matter, what was the context of these oh-so-vague texts you rely so heavily on? Oh, what's that you say? You have not the foggiest idea what these texts say, aside from a vague cop's paraphrasing? Huh. You sure do seem to extrapolate a lot...considering you have no idea what they actually say.
Addressed above.

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Damn. Another lie. Saying she wants to kill like 400 people for fun is not remotely saying that she plans to carry out a mass murder on a specific time (really, really can't wait to see your citation for the time).
Addressed above. And, she said she was going to kill 400 people for fun, not that she merely wanted to or would like to.

Trying to carve out and attack these points individually, does not dispel the existence of the plan. It isn't any single one of these elements, but the combination of all of them together that makes the "plot".

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
And there it is. I say that the evidence as presented is insufficient to pass judgment. You 'and the rest of us' have dropped the gavel without knowing exactly what it is. Couldn't have put it better myself, thanks.
As I said, we will see. I predict she will be found guilty, or will enter a plea to that effect.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd September 2019, 11:40 PM   #193
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,539
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Just like Nikolas Cruz did.



...and it certainly didn't for Nikolas Cruz.




Just like Nikolas Cruz was.



Again, just like Nikolas Cruz.



[Checkmite: I hope you don't mind but I've rewritten the following part of your post to present it as a list]




I wonder how many more items Thermal would need to add to that checklist before he/she would take Ms Wilson's threats seriously?
I think you'd need to see that she had done the calculations for the ballistic trajectories of the bullets taking into account a range of distances from the target (obviously she would have had to do a lot of measurements in the graduation ceremony venue prior to the shooting to cover the full range of possible distances and angles) , calibrated of course by extensive experiments with the actual gun and ammunition, using a random sampling of ammunition from various batches of ammunition... Then you'd expect to see a vigorous statistical analysis of the data to ensure that it was possible to hit people at the venue with the guns and ammunition she was planning to use the . Then a second series of experiments to demonstrate that under those conditions it is likely that she would be able to inflict lethal wounds. That would probably need to involve the use of human cadavers rather than relying on using say pig cadavers or ballastic jelly stand ins as they only approximate damage to humans.

I mean who could be said to be planning a mass shooting at a school without doing all the above?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 22nd September 2019 at 11:45 PM. Reason: Ashooting prevented
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 12:51 AM   #194
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,929
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
You seem too have a pretty low opinion of Americans, who presumably learned from the mistakes that happened with Nicolas Cruz.
In the 19 months since February 14, 2018 (the day Nikolas Cruz shot up Marjory Stoneman-Douglas High School, killing 17 people and wounding 17 more) there have been a further 52 school shootings in the USA, resulting in 30 people killed and 71 wounded . I don't have a low opinion of all Americans, but yeah, I think they haven't learned a single goddamn thing since the mistakes that happened with Nicolas Cruz..... must be well practised at sending thoughts and prayers though!

Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
see you also support the claim that doe eyed Alexis cited a specific time? Great. The same challenge to cite it is offered to you. The range from citing the time and I eat humble pie, to you are a cowardly liar. I await your citation, or victory crickets.
https://www.timesenterprise.com/cnhi...d9f6f382f.html

ETA: deleted the rest of my answer because Checkmite did a way better job of debunking your inane bollocks!
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 23rd September 2019 at 01:35 AM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 12:57 AM   #195
EHocking
Philosopher
 
EHocking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 7,127
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Some of the articles about these cases.

I'm not saying anything other than a sizable chunk of them, of the few female rampage killers there are, appear to fit this profile. It would make some sense, if the idea that male narcissism and rage is the root of these types of acts is true. Not including terrorism and wartime violence of course.
All the articles I could find merely concluded that there are so few incidences that no conclusions could be arrived at. Certainly there were none that pointed to masculinity, trans, or lesbian tendencies or blaming men for female mass killers.

Assertions like this, and your response above, merely smacks of misandry.
It’s not the first time such sly digs have been hidden in posts on this forum and it’s beginning to irritate me.

So that’s why I called this one out.
__________________
"A closed mouth gathers no feet"
"Ignorance is a renewable resource" P.J.O'Rourke
"It's all god's handiwork, there's little quality control applied", Fox26 reporter on Texas granite
You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it. Art Buchwald

Last edited by EHocking; 23rd September 2019 at 01:02 AM.
EHocking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 06:45 AM   #196
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 7,091
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I think you'd need to see that she had done the calculations for the ballistic trajectories of the bullets taking into account a range of distances from the target (obviously she would have had to do a lot of measurements in the graduation ceremony venue prior to the shooting to cover the full range of possible distances and angles) , calibrated of course by extensive experiments with the actual gun and ammunition, using a random sampling of ammunition from various batches of ammunition... Then you'd expect to see a vigorous statistical analysis of the data to ensure that it was possible to hit people at the venue with the guns and ammunition she was planning to use the . Then a second series of experiments to demonstrate that under those conditions it is likely that she would be able to inflict lethal wounds. That would probably need to involve the use of human cadavers rather than relying on using say pig cadavers or ballastic jelly stand ins as they only approximate damage to humans.

I mean who could be said to be planning a mass shooting at a school without doing all the above?
This made me laugh really hard.

As far as the planning, man. This all made me realize how little effort my dad puts into going hunting, where he expects to kill multiple animals. He just kind of...loads up his guns and heads to the stand. Points at insert_animal_here and pulls the trigger. Wait until I tell him he's been doing it all wrong for years.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss

Last edited by plague311; 23rd September 2019 at 08:15 AM.
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 07:16 AM   #197
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Your argument seems to be that if she did not correctly and wisely plan to address the security issue as part of her plans, and/or that portion of her planning didn't ever make it out of her head and into some kind of persistent record, that somehow proves that her school shooting plot was never serious, or that she wasn't "really" planning anything at all.

If that's not what your argument "actually" is, then maybe you need to put in some effort to communicate it in a more straightforward manner, rather than relying on innuendo and snark. You are the one in control of how your message is delivered.
My argument has been, since the beginning: the evidence is flimsy for an actual plot to do anything being in place. She could just as well have been cultivating a bad-girl image that blew up in her face.

Other posters keep adding details and fleshing them out further to create a more elaborate, and damning, narrative. This is what I am challenging.

Is that clear enough for you?

Quote:
I think this is semantic hand-wringing. She remains in custody charged with plotting the shooting she had been arrested for threatening.
No. It is yet another example of you changing the facts to create a more damning narrative.

Quote:
Many of your objections are nitpicks and addressing them in most cases requires reciting the basic facts of the case.
No. Many of my objections are calling you out on changing the facts to create a more damning narrative.

Quote:
I would certainly hope that people in the United States aren't hunting with AK-47's.
I said marksman and hunter, as her parents claimed. I'm sure it was entirely innocent that you forgot to read that.

Quote:
You have already conceded that her plot involved the graduation ceremony....
That is a lie. Two, actually. I don't think she was plotting to do a damn thing. And the graduation ceremony is just kind of assumed to be her target event, because of a couple texts of unknown context. But more on this below:

Quote:
...That is a specific event, which by very definition has 1) a specific date, 2) a specific time, and 3) a specific location all inextricably attached to it.
This is why I love you. Treating you like a child for the moment:

Do you know that the current month is September, Checkmite? Did you know that high school graduations are in the late spring, Checkmite? Here it comes: did you know that the graduation does not have a specific time or place yet Checkmite? No one knows how many snow closings will happen yet, and schools have to satisfy minimum open days. So there was no date or time set at all.

Semantic handwringing, you shriek? Nope. It's another example of you spinning the few facts we have in order to present a more damning narrative.

Quote:
By invoking the event as the target, she was necessarily naming a time as well as a date and a place.
This is a lie. She did not invoke anything. Graduation dates were simply said to be found on her phone. Ooooooh, maybe she had those dates on her calendar to keep the date open for the volunteer setup work you theorized earlier! You so smart. Why didn't I see that sooner?

She did not invoke the graduation date in any known context. You are misrepresenting facts in order to create a more damning narrative.

Quote:
You can understand this, right? If she went to the venue, but at some time other than when the event is scheduled to take place, the graduation ceremony would not be in progress when she arrived, and thus she would not be attacking the graduation ceremony.
She had a date on her phone. It is not reported to have a little skull and crossbones emoji next to it, or a 'D-Day' or anything. Just a date. Coupled with her comment about 'lot of people in her school she would like to do it to', you (and others) are assuming that she planned to mass murder at the graduation. This is not a fact in evidence. You are presenting your assumptions as fact to create a more damning narrative.

Quote:
Then your objection has shifted from denial that any plan existed at all, to that it wasn't a particularly impressive plan? How "good" and "thorough" or even how "reasonable" the plan was doesn't really matter that much.
My objection remains the same. If she was plotting anything, it was in the idle fantasy stages. But I am not yet convinced this whole shebang was anything more than bad-girl posing. We'll see, as more information comes out.

Quote:
What sets her apart is showing an intent and positive steps toward enacting the plan.
Not in evidence. Only surmised and assumed from blurbs. The only know step of any kind was buying a gun, which is not remotely unusual. FFS, we don't even know what the texts say and in what context. This is the classic 'too early to drop the gavel' scenario. But not for you, evidently.

Quote:
Addressed Evaded above.
FTFY. That was one lame-ass evasion, by the way. I specifically said not to try and say 'well, we can assume that..'. No. You said she cited a specific date and time. Neither even exists yet, even if we assume further that the graduation was the target event. You are changing facts to present a more damning narrative. That is my argument.

Quote:
As I said, we will see. I predict she will be found guilty, or will enter a plea to that effect.
And I predict a plea down to the original misdemeanor, or trial and found guilty of threats but not plotting. Taking bets?
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 07:26 AM   #198
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
In the 19 months since February 14, 2018 (the day Nikolas Cruz shot up Marjory Stoneman-Douglas High School, killing 17 people and wounding 17 more) there have been a further 52 school shootings in the USA, resulting in 30 people killed and 71 wounded . I don't have a low opinion of all Americans, but yeah, I think they haven't learned a single goddamn thing since the mistakes that happened with Nicolas Cruz..... must be well practised at sending thoughts and prayers though!
Well, that's unfortunately true. We are not learning well. It really does drive me out of my mind that a weapon like that is still available at the corner store to someone with a driver's license.

Quote:
https://www.timesenterprise.com/cnhi...d9f6f382f.html

ETA: deleted the rest of my answer because Checkmite did a way better job of debunking your inane bollocks!
Hardly debunked. Just bobbed and weaved without showing the honesty to admit that s/he just made it up.

Saying 'she had a specific date, place and time' makes it sound like an actual plan. But what is the actual evidence?

An apparently tentative date nine months away, somewhere in a text with no context. Nothing more.
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 07:30 AM   #199
Thermal
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 8,894
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I think you'd need to see that she had done the calculations for the ballistic trajectories of the bullets taking into account a range of distances from the target (obviously she would have had to do a lot of measurements in the graduation ceremony venue prior to the shooting to cover the full range of possible distances and angles) , calibrated of course by extensive experiments with the actual gun and ammunition, using a random sampling of ammunition from various batches of ammunition... Then you'd expect to see a vigorous statistical analysis of the data to ensure that it was possible to hit people at the venue with the guns and ammunition she was planning to use the . Then a second series of experiments to demonstrate that under those conditions it is likely that she would be able to inflict lethal wounds. That would probably need to involve the use of human cadavers rather than relying on using say pig cadavers or ballastic jelly stand ins as they only approximate damage to humans.

I mean who could be said to be planning a mass shooting at a school without doing all the above?
Nothing like a good strawman as fall approaches!

Hey Darat: you have said you are a lawyer, right? Does the evidence as presented constitute a plan to you, punishable by up to ten years in prison? No conjecture or assumptions, now, just the actual evidence?
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd September 2019, 08:23 AM   #200
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 7,091
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Nothing like a good strawman as fall approaches!

Hey Darat: you have said you are a lawyer, right? Does the evidence as presented constitute a plan to you, punishable by up to ten years in prison? No conjecture or assumptions, now, just the actual evidence?
The charges have her punishable by up to life in prison actually:

Quote:
Prosecutors have elevated to terrorism the criminal complaints against the former McAlester High School student accused of threatening a mass shooting with her newly acquired AK-47.

Terrorism can result in the maximum penalty of life in prison upon conviction.

Alexis Wilson, 18, of McAlester, was initially charged on Monday with perpetrating a terrorist hoax and endeavoring to perform an act of violence. They carry maximum prison sentences of 10 years.

District Attorney Chuck Sullivan increased the severity of the charges after reviewing the case with sheriff’s investigators who checked the contents of Wilson’s iPhone. Wilson’s bail bond was also doubled to $500,000.
I've stated this multiple times. If I wasn't laughing so hard at the ridiculousness of your "points", your constant requirement that other people prove your points, and goalpost moving I would take this much more seriously. As it is though, I'm going to listen to the police. Who have taken increased charges after getting more information, though I'm still waiting for you to point out where I jumped the gun. That's a ******** statement if I ever read one.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:07 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.