U S Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, a Democrat, shot at public appearance!!

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
I can see that line of logic.

But, I really don't see it going anywhere. I seriously doubt if any jury or Judge would buy the argument. This is going to be painted as one deranged person doing an unexplainable act.

It is just too common for people to use the term 'target' an opponent or other such terms.
 
deep said:
I can see that line of logic.

But, I really don't see it going anywhere. I seriously doubt if any jury or Judge would buy the argument. This is going to be painted as one deranged person doing an unexplainable act.

It is just too common for people to use the term 'target' an opponent or other such terms.
Click to expand...

Well, all you need is:

1. A little bit of evidence demonstrating that Loughner was somehow motivated by the Palin rhetoric and target map.

2. An extremely sympathetic plaintiff (a murdered beautiful little girl who is the granddaughter of a World Series winning beloved baseball manager).

3. An outraged jury, in a federal district court (you pick the venue) that does not appreciate this rhetoric, and is not so maniacal about gun rights.

Again, the First Amendment protects people from criminal prosecution (by the government) for most things they say, but it does not necessarily protect them from civil liability if what they say causes harm to others (whether physical, emotional, financial, etc.). The negligence case would be somewhat straightforward as long as the jury found that it was forseeable that Palin's rhetoric would incite someone (including deranged followers) to take action, and the jury finds a causal relationship between the negligent/reckless statements and the killer's actions.

Even if the civil suit(s) are ultimately unsuccessful, the threat of the possible success, and the very expensive costs to defend them, are still probably enough to make people in the Palin position think twice before going on like this any more. Defending several big civil suits is very expensive (even if you win).
 
While this incident is so incredibly sad on many levels but especially for the victims and families, I suspect it may tame the political vitriol across the board to some extent. Public figures who try to "motivate" by inciting hate and violence will be under the gun :)sexywink:) no matter what the mental state and motivations of the shooter are revealed to be.

Criminal or civil actions aside, I'd venture to say that this is going to leave a permanent scar on any aspirations Sarah Palin may have had for a political career. You betcha.

TLC reportedly pulls plug on 'Palin's Alaska' - Entertainment - Reality TV - TODAYshow.com
 
It is hard to put a label on him. I would not put much value on a book list on some internet site. Who know why one puts them up.

I will tell you conservatives do not (for the most part) claim Hitler any more than liberals (for the most part) claim Communist icons.


If I had to use a label on this guy, I'd say he is more right. He mentions (in his writings, assuming they are his) The Constitution and backing money with gold. Those things are favorites of many conservatives.

And lets get one thing straight, regardless of how moderate Gifford is being portrayed. In AZ she was the big liberal target, that this guy went after. The Governor is GOP, both Senators are GOP, 5 of the 8 Congresspersons are GOP. She was anti-AZ 1070, the immigration bill, she favored immigration reform with a path to citizenship, and an avid supporter of Obama Care. She had a bloody re-election in Nov and was not declared the winner until 3 days after the election, by 1%. So yes the Tea Party, and the GOP establishment were after her. With the GOP completely in charge of reapportionment, she probably would not have won reelection in 2012.

If she recovers and has good mental faculties, she will have a much better shot of being reelected.
 
Meet Daniel Hernandez, the intern who likely saved Gabrielle Giffords’ life

hernandez-giffords.jpg


Daniel Hernandez had only been Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' intern for five days, and on Saturday, he may have saved her life.

The University of Arizona junior was standing 30 feet away from the Democratic congresswoman when she was shot in the head at a meet-and-greet event in her district, and he immediately rushed to her side. As everyone on hand waited for emergency medical support to arrive, Hernandez held Giffords's head in his lap and applied pressure to her wound.
At the same time, Hernandez advised others on providing help for the other 20 others injured and killed in the attack—and that quick thinking has led many to label him a hero in Saturday's horrific event.
"When I heard gunshots, my first instinct was to head toward the congresswoman to make sure that she was okay," Hernandez said in an interview with ABC's Christine Amanpour Sunday. "Once I saw that she was down, and there were more than one victim, I went ahead and started doing the limited triage that I could with what I had."
Hernandez, who is 20, told ABC that he simply "shut off all emotion." "I knew I wouldn't be good to anyone if I had a breakdown," he recalled. He noted that he went to help because he had "limited experience in triage and training."
He lifted up Giffords' head, because he feared she might choke on her own blood, and used smocks from the grocery store's meat department as a makeshift bandages for her and other victims.
Giffords, he says, was alert, but couldn't talk.
"'Just grab my hand to let me know that you're okay,'" he recalls telling the injured lawmaker.
According to Hernandez, she squeezed his hand, and he didn't let go, riding with her in the ambulance to the hospital, where she was rushed into emergency surgery.
"It was probably not the best idea to run toward the gunshots," he told the Arizona Republic. "But people needed help."
Click to expand...

Meet Daniel Hernandez, the intern who likely saved Gabrielle Giffords’ life - Yahoo! News
 
Knuckle said:
Well, all you need is:
Click to expand...

check this out

Dem planning bill that would outlaw threatening lawmakers - The Hill's Blog Briefing Room

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...s-legislation-to-protect-lawmakers-officials/

Rep. Robert Brady (D-Pa.) reportedly plans to introduce legislation that would make it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a federal official or member of Congress.
Click to expand...
 
deep said:
I will tell you conservatives do not (for the most part) claim Hitler any more than liberals (for the most part) claim Communist icons.
Click to expand...
But conservatives like to paint both Hitler and Marx as being ultra liberal, which makes no sense.
 
He liked Hitler. Hitler was a totalitarian. So why am I being told he's left wing for reading Hitler?
Click to expand...

They're saying that because his favorite books were Mein Kampf, and the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. Sounds like he was just really into political revolution. He really reminds me of Timothy McVeigh, very anti-government. (His myspace page said that the government uses mind-control on the population :huh:) I watched some of his bizzare shit on youtube as well, it was just really weird. No way this guy was sane.

maybe listen to a Taylor Swift song or two.
Click to expand...

I went shooting the other day, while listening to my taylor swift playlist. :)
 
deep said:
I can see that line of logic.

But, I really don't see it going anywhere. I seriously doubt if any jury or Judge would buy the argument.
Click to expand...

I agree with you.

Even with the lower burden of proof in civil cases, I don't see this as being successful.

However, on another level, it doesn't have to be. A protracted civil case, even one that would be a losing one in the end, or may get tossed out of court for evidentiary reasons, would mark the end of any sort of political career that Sarah Palin may have had. Just absolutely toxic.
 
anitram said:
I agree with you.

Even with the lower burden of proof in civil cases, I don't see this as being successful.

However, on another level, it doesn't have to be. A protracted civil case, even one that would be a losing one in the end, or may get tossed out of court for evidentiary reasons, would mark the end of any sort of political career that Sarah Palin may have had. Just absolutely toxic.
Click to expand...

And to that end:

Live Blog: Latest Developments on Arizona Shooting - NYTimes.com

11:15 A.M. |Palin Advisers Respond to Criticism About Target Map

One of Sarah Palin's top aides responded Sunday to mounting criticism that she had helped to incite the kind of violence that exploded in Arizona at a meet-and-greet by Ms. Giffords, wounding 20 and killing six.

In the wake of the shooting, many people drew attention to a map of the United States that had been part of one of Ms. Palin's Web sites that showed targets on the districts of lawmakers who supported President Obama's health care legislation.

Ms. Giffords was one of the targeted lawmakers, as she noted in an interview on MSNBC last year.

In a radio interview Saturday night, one of Ms. Palin's top aides, Rebecca Mansour, said of the map of lawmakers: "We never, ever, ever intended it to be gun sights." Ms Mansour said attemps to tie Ms. Palin to the violence were "obscene" and "appalling."

"I don't understand how anyone can be held responsible for someone who is completely mentally unstable like this," Ms. Mansour said. "Where I come from the person who is actually shooting is culpable. We had nothing whatsoever to do with this."

She added: "People who knew him said that he is left wing and very liberal. But that is not to say that I am blaming the left for him either."

Ms. Mansour, who helps run SarahPAC, Ms. Palin's political action committee, made the remarks to Tammy Bruce, a radio talk show host, on a podcast made public on the internet. Ms. Bruce is introduced at the beginning of her show as "a chick with a gun and a microphone."

Ms. Bruce complained on her show that liberals were incorrectly politicizing the shooting by blaming conservatives.

"We all know that the liberals, there's something wrong with them," Ms. Bruce said. "The reaction on the left was to start blaming somebody."

Ms. Bruce added that: "Saying that a mass murdering crazy guy is representative somehow of the political dialogue going on, especially with the non violent Tea Party movement....and yet there are attach this to the tea party and other politicians."
 
VintagePunk said:
In a radio interview Saturday night, one of Ms. Palin's top aides, Rebecca Mansour, said of the map of lawmakers: "We never, ever, ever intended it to be gun sights."
Click to expand...

Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

palinbullseye.jpg
 
I think this guy definitely seems mentally ill, so I don't know if he was even capable of having any real and/or intellectual political motivations. But the truth remains that it has gotten out of hand in this country, so much so that who knows who could have those and take them to a violent extreme on a daily basis. She was targeted and threatened over her vote for health care. Look at how some people behaved during that time.

It won't change though, when the story fades it will go back to business as usual. But it sure is a damn shame that that beautiful little girl never will again, nor will any of the other people who died. Looking at that picture of her breaks my heart.
 
The_Pac_Mule said:
They're saying that because his favorite books were Mein Kampf, and the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx. Sounds like he was just really into political revolution. He really reminds me of Timothy McVeigh, very anti-government. (His myspace page said that the government uses mind-control on the population :huh:) I watched some of his bizzare shit on youtube as well, it was just really weird. No way this guy was sane.
Click to expand...
If I had to allege some common theme to his "favorite books"--at least, those with clear ideological content; several of the titles were merely children's fiction classics--I think my observation would be that nearly all of them tend to be popular with people obsessed with conspiracy theories (please note, I'm not suggesting that all people interested in those particular titles fit that description, or are unbalanced, etc.). I don't think that observation points either right or left, but given the context, perhaps it's a reminder that politicans and pundits of whichever party who habitually frame their opponents in conspiracy-theory terms should always be viewed with great caution and skepticism--even when you agree with many of their policy stances--because by definition one can't engage in the basic acts of democracy, working together and building consensus, with someone you literally believe is out to destroy you.

As deep suggested though, a YouTube profile hardly counts as a manifesto nor a declaration of much of anything, so best not to read too much into it.
AliEnvy said:
While this incident is so incredibly sad on many levels but especially for the victims and families, I suspect it may tame the political vitriol across the board to some extent. Public figures who try to "motivate" by inciting hate and violence will be under the gun :)sexywink:) no matter what the mental state and motivations of the shooter are revealed to be.
Click to expand...
I hope you are right about this.
 
GirlsAloudFan said:
This is just my personal stance, but I find guns and automatic weapons completely terrifying, full stop. They are scary as shit. God, I can't even get into it and sound coherent but, fuck. I hate guns. So frightening.

Why and how was this psycho given a gun? We need to cut down on that shit. In my very humble opinion, gun violence is just about the single worst thing in the United States of America. It's a whole culture, it's scary beyond belief, it kills people, etc. etc. etc. Ugh. Fuck guns.

Fuck guns.

I'm sure I sound naive and lame and all of that, but I don't care. Let's stop selling guns to U.S. citizens. And the guns that are already out there, on the street, and in homes, let's just fucking get rid of all of them. Let's all eat pizza and laugh together and enjoy eachother's company and enjoy what we have and maybe listen to a Taylor Swift song or two.

Wow, so i'm sounding like a complete idiot right now, but I just heard about this news story about 30 minutes ago, read through this entire thread, and it has hit me like a brick. I've ceased watching playoff football and am trying to get all of the facts together on this.

I really, really, really, fucking wish that this psycopath had not been allowed to purchase a gun. I wish guns were never even fucking invented.

Peace and love.
Click to expand...

*Claps* Thank. You. My sentiments exactly. We as a culture are far, FAR too obsessed with guns, and it's incredibly disturbing.

I just heard about this a few moments ago, myself. I am truly stunned. Those poor victims, that little girl, for Christ's sake...I just...I can't imagine...

My thoughts go out to Rep. Giffords, I hope she can make a full recovery from her injuries. And my deepest sympathies and condolences to all who lost loved ones to this asshole. I hope they throw the book at him and he gets the most severe punishment imaginable. I read those bits about the signs ahead of time with this guy and am floored that that wasn't motivation enough to do something about him then. What the hell?

corianderstem said:
Assuming this was politically motivated (and honestly, when this stuff happens, I assume there's some level of mental illness involved as well), I'd like to see people in high places refer to this sort of thing as what it is: terrorism.

The guy who shoots a politician he disagrees with. The guy who flies a plane into an IRS building. The guy sending mail bombs to Maryland government. Terrorists.

They get dismissed as lone crazies, but I'd say they're pretty easily spurred on by the rhetoric being spewed by talking heads and politicians.

To paraphrase a certain singer from a Bullet the Blue Sky rant - Hey, middle eastern terrorists, we don't need your help. America's making war upon itself.

(Again, this is assuming it was politically motivated.)
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree with this as well. Given that it was a political rally and the guy seemed awfully anti-government, I would find it hard to believe his actions had no political motivations whatsoever. But yes, if his shooting was political in nature, he is definitely a terrorist and should be treated as such. The terrorists on 9/11, that's precisely what they wanted: for America to crumble in on itself. Sadly, it looks like they're succeeding in that goal. I definitely agree that the blame ultimately lies with the person who committed the crime, but let's not kid ourselves and deny the fact that some of the overly dramatic, vitriolic, anger-fueled speech from those in power is helping add to this insanity. EVERYBODY, I don't care what side you fall on politically, needs to desperately take it down a few hundred notches. EVERYBODY. It's not worth it.

Angela
 
Irvine511 said:
could you provide some examples of the "extreme left" using violent rhetoric in their language in the way that the former nominee for VP form the GOP does?
Click to expand...

Off the top of my head...

Barack Obama saying something along the lines of "If they bring a knife, you bring a gun"... The beating of Kenneth Gladney by SEIU members.... A Democrat challenging GOP Congressman JD Hayworth in 2006 using a campaign ad in which Hayworth is featured in the crosshairs of a rifle... Multiple guests on MSNBC in the past few months making calls for violent revolutions... The fact that Olbermann references "the worst people in the world" (99.9% of them being conservatives, and largely prominent people like politicians and media figures)... The fact that Olby begins said segment with "get out your pitchforks and torches".... DailyKos kook Markos Moulitsas naming his book "American Taliban"... NPR's Nina Totenberg wishing AIDS on Jesse Helms... And if we're saying that the word "target" is off limits now, I can cite countless press releases and postings from Media Matters, Kos, DCCC, etc, referencing politicians that are "targets" and have "bullseyes" on them. I haven't even brought up the violent threats and attacks made against President Bush over the past decade, and I hope you won't make me. Should I start, I could go on for days.

I don't want to drag this discussion back into the trenches, but it needs to be emphasized that this happens on both sides. Trying to emphatically state which party traffics in that more is pointless and impossible to know, and I echo the sentiments that a tragedy like this should simply not happen in America, as if that even needs to be said.
 
YouTube - Keith Olbermann Special Comment On Gabrielle Giffords Shooting


A friend of mine reminded me today of a quotation from Mr.Rogers: "Look for the heroes in the story; the helpers. " The young man who probably saved Giffords' life by using his emergency response training is one of them. I'm sure there were others.

And kudos to Sheriff Dupnik for not backing down, reiterating tonight what he said last night, that the violent imagery and rhetoric from members of the media, while maybe not directly responsible for this, contributed to the climate that led to this event.
 
PhilsFan said:
He liked Hitler. Hitler was a totalitarian. So why am I being told he's left wing for reading Hitler?
Click to expand...

Maybe you're being rhetorical...but I'd like to answer.

Right Libertarians are basically seen as liberal to Right Authoritarians who don't understand the difference between Right/Left and how it relates to Authoritarian/Libertarian. "liberal" is selectively used, depending on the issue. Everyone can remember Ron Paul was "liberal" on the war in '08 according to the rest of the party.

Those paranoid militia types could potentially be Left or Right, but they will always be Libertarians who don't trust Govt.

Both Right and Left Libertarians, in a nutshell, are closer to Anarchy on the extreme. Right Authoritarians are closer to the Totalitarian on the extreme.

I think the guy was just clueless. This is common with that 'ilk'. They don't want the Govt to fuck with them, but they wouldn't mind seeing their Govt or even a new Govt push certain people around. Just not them.

But to answer the question...to deflect attention away - politically - or perhaps just sheer Glen-Beck-like-ignorance...into saying that the guy was on the Left, because he doesn't fit the typical 'Republican' Authoritarian way. To sum, the guy was likely naturally attracted to Right wing-Hitler's social politics and fucked pup the role of Govt in his own mind...and the people saying that Hitler was Left wing don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
 
What is wrong with those fuckheads? Is 15 minutes of fame really worth all of this? I can't stand those people and their sad excuse for a "church"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
the little stranger chapter 3
Replies
0
Views
576
annj
A
A
the little stranger chapter 4
Replies
0
Views
575
annj
A
MrsSpringsteen
Eliza Dushku OpEd
Replies
1
Views
749
Moonlit_Angel
Moonlit_Angel
MrsSpringsteen
Bono Wants One Campaign To Be NRA For The World's Poor
Replies
2
Views
607
lazarus
lazarus
GraceRyan
Mysterious Ways - Chapter 31
Replies
10
Views
1K
lharper
lharper

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom