Debate Ishtar on ethics of school shootings, fathers, CPS

That’s entirely fair actually. I have zero doubts I would be rejected by a large number of peers, even in increasingly narrow circles. I don’t deny it at all.

People can think I’m evil, crazy or stupid. It’s fine, it rolls off my back. I’ve been called worse, I’ve had people threaten to murder me for saying things far tamer than I’ve said on KF.

But don’t call me a liar or a poser. Maybe I am just so weird that not even the craziest radical CHUDs would accept me. Okay, then I walk alone in this life.

But what does that prove? That I am an anti social freak? Fine. But what I am not, is a dishonest man.

And honesty matters far to me than social acceptance much less status. That is what separates me from most people, I just don’t care and have never cared about tailoring myself for social inclusion, or playing silly status games. I’ve always spoken my mind right or wrong and I’ve always been willing to bare the cost of isolation and reprisal.

It’s not much, but honesty and integrity are virtues I aspire to uphold. Regardless.
 
Last edited:
That’s entirely fair actually. I have zero doubts I would be rejected by a large number of peers, even in increasingly narrow circles. I don’t deny it at all.

People can think I’m evil, crazy or stupid. It’s fine, it rolls off my back. I’ve been called worse, I’ve had people threaten to murder me for saying things far tamer than I’ve said on KF.

But don’t call me a liar or a poser. Maybe I am just so weird that not even the craziest radical CHUDs would accept me. Okay, then I walk alone in this life.

But what does that prove? That I am an anti social freak? Fine. But what I am not, is a dishonest man.

And honesty matters far to me than social acceptance much less status. That is what separates me from most people, I just don’t care and have never cared about tailoring myself for social inclusion, or playing silly status games. I’ve always spoken my mind right or wrong and I’ve always been willing to bare the cost of isolation and reprisal.

It’s not much, but honesty and integrity are virtues I aspire to uphold. Regardless.
"Well, I might be a brutish, slope-brained, inhuman barbarian who thinks whether or not basic fucking empathy for and righteous anger over the murder of helpless children should be based entirely on how fucking light their skin pigmentation is, but at least I'm honest!"
 
I could somewhat understand the compassion if he actually shot up people responsible like his abusive mother (gypsy rose style), but shooting up harmless innocents that literally did nothing to him while letting the people supposedly responsible unharmed is very cringe and very gay and deserves absolutely no sympathy.

Just like sympathy can be earned, it can be lost. If his mother was bad for abusing him, then what is he for straight up murdering people?

Do we feel compassion for the abusive mother because up the line she had whatever sob story to justify her actions in return?

How far back do we go before we find a person actually responsible for their own actions?

How shitty does your life have to be before you get a blank cheque to do whatever you want and still receive compassion?

Compassion is a limited resource (it has to be, otherwise it would be pointless), and there are far better targets for it than this guy.

Sometimes a piece of shit unworthy of compassion is just a piece of shit unworthy of compassion, this is one such case.
 
The new tactic seems to be to charge parents for daring to have a guns in the house. This is getting dark unless there are some really extraordinary details they found out really quickly.
Both the Crumblies AND this shooter's father bought their shooter sons a gun as a gift.

Both sets of parents had warnings that their sons from authorities that their sons may have homicidal ideations, yet the parents didn't take away their child's gun.

But yes, I do agree that this might quickly tumble into a much more slippery slope.

This could go all the way down to charging parents if their kid is involved in an auto accident that kills another person.

This charging parents shit needs to have firm boundaries. As the laws are written, they don't appear to have satisfactory limits.
 
I could somewhat understand the compassion if he actually shot up people responsible like his abusive mother (gypsy rose style), but shooting up harmless innocents that literally did nothing to him while letting the people supposedly responsible unharmed is very cringe and very gay and deserves absolutely no sympathy.
This logic doesn't matter to him, he's a self-admitted wignat who's willing to minimize the responsibility of a mass shooter as long as he killed at least one black even if it means the mass shooter killed two white teachers who very likely had white kids.
 
I will withdraw from this thread, I concede nothing. Only that I am right and everyone else is wrong.
What is wrong? This is now the retarded mass shooting debate thread. Every time I feel the urge to shove my opinion or respond to opinion in the main thread, I stop, quote the person and drag my retarded discussion over here.

I save my top fact related posts on the shooting for the main thread. Null is right. People still need to talk things out. But there is no need to shit up the main shooting thread to do that.

You done good by prompting this alternative thread discussion.
 
Look at that little shit. Sitting there alive in court. With all of the media attention.

Outside of his possible hope that someone would stop him (he gave up immediately to the school security officer), he got his next big dream. He is now a mass murder school shooter. Chains. Cuffs. Jail. All of the attention he could ever want. He gets to think he is an edgy school shooter.

If there is any justice, that little shit needs to have the shit beat out of him in jail on a daily basis. He needs to be humiliated on a regular basis and seen of the joke that he is.

Mr. Metokur is right. Society can't be allowed to be portrayed as some sort of anti-hero. Where is the sheriff that makes his prisoners wear pink jumpers?

Look at that crack house barbie dye job.

Crack House Barbie
colt-gray.jpg

His mother loved meth more than him.
 
But White people are going to continue to be degraded under Jewish power unless we adopt some behaviors that resemble niggers-the main one being tribal loyalty.
Nigger, there's no "white" tribe and we aren't in some backwater bush where "muh tribal loyalty" needs to be a thing. Tribal anything is for savages and savages only, not civilized people. White people have countries, empires, tribes have reservations.
 
One was a nigger, and the other appears to be a spic. The teachers definitely yeah.

Okay maybe the second kid was White.

Ah well three lives of value lost then.
Remember when I gave you a warning for calling for a purge of LGBT people, and you defended yourself by saying you were upset about dead children? Good to know that was a load of crap.
Edit: It was worse than I remembered. He wanted to purge Mexicans, Asians, Jews, Blacks, and feminists as well.
 
Last edited:
If the shooter were a troon, or even mixed race I’d genuinely retract everything I have said in the past 48 hours and issue a public apology.

No joke.
I propose we replace this man with a single (1) Chinese man who will own a very good restaurant and the shooter and his parents with said Chinese man’s children, who will grow up conservatively and raise US math grade statistics instead of meth usage statistics.
 
I'm going to be real with you, I was a depressed and lonely teenager myself. I was angry and I felt ignored. (And was bullied) and I had a much more supportive home life and surrounding circle than this kid.

So yes I do feel empathy for him. Not everyone has loving family, or teachers and staff that care, or people that try to understand you. Or take you seriously but not literally.

Everything I've said in this thread comes from compassion, not vengeance or spite.
Were you bullied by Jamal and Pedro?
 
That’s entirely fair actually. I have zero doubts I would be rejected by a large number of peers, even in increasingly narrow circles. I don’t deny it at all.

People can think I’m evil, crazy or stupid. It’s fine, it rolls off my back. I’ve been called worse, I’ve had people threaten to murder me for saying things far tamer than I’ve said on KF.

But don’t call me a liar or a poser. Maybe I am just so weird that not even the craziest radical CHUDs would accept me. Okay, then I walk alone in this life.

But what does that prove? That I am an anti social freak? Fine. But what I am not, is a dishonest man.

And honesty matters far to me than social acceptance much less status. That is what separates me from most people, I just don’t care and have never cared about tailoring myself for social inclusion, or playing silly status games. I’ve always spoken my mind right or wrong and I’ve always been willing to bare the cost of isolation and reprisal.

It’s not much, but honesty and integrity are virtues I aspire to uphold. Regardless.

There is no virtue nor integrity in any view you have articulated. Hate doesn't have either of those. Be hateful all you want (as you admittedly are), but don't try to dress it up or try to fool yourself it's virtuous. Just own it as an un-virtuous thing.

I actively or passively "hate" maybe a couple of people in the world I know or am proximate to, for harms done to me or my loved ones specifically, and I know that it is both understandable and also a moral failing on my part to harbor that hate.

I also "hate" what some people I don't know do or have done, and I think some of them are useless, horrible people for whom I have nothing but contempt. I don't feel bad for having contempt for an horrific abuser or killer (though I well know it is objectively not a noble feeling on my part), and I don't feel particularly bad about a Dahmer or Ramirez getting prison justice, for example. But if I were walking around with such a seething rage about them I had to make a point to inject it in every third comment I make in x context, I'd be pretty sure that I'd have lost my own plot and needed to turn my attention to being better.

If you're petty, narrow, bloodthirsty, jingoistic, seething, irrational, or hateful (or at root scared, lost, displacing, attention-seeking, compensating, or unwilling to make or incapable of making even medium-fine distinctions), or just congenitally (euphemistically) a small, nasty person, don't try to dress it up as "virtue."

You have certain lazy views that you may consider principles, but all principles are not virtuous merely by being doggedly clung to by a powerless little person seeking to elevate fear of impotence to a righteous moral scheme.

As far as I have observed there is little-to-nothing you have said about this or anything else that is noble, righteous, virtuous or indicating integrity. As for honesty, it's impossible to characterize self-serving leaps of logic in order to make your indulging of your basest fantasies as "honest," because your starting point is lack of honesty with yourself.

I am amused that you took my point about the fact that your ideas are stupid and irrational (using some rough, and favorable-to-you, math) as an occasion to mentally elevate your apparent resentment and possibly sociopathic tendencies to being some Romantic loner-figure, living according to virtuous principle, rejected by the swine and know-nothings around him. Two thoughts:

1. There is no inherent virtue in the mere fact of being an outcast. It's neutral. And if it's because you have odious fantasies, it's a negative.

2. You fantasize murderous white domination, as though you have a tribe that would claim you. How feasible is it if virtually no one will claim you? And so OK, stay mad for the next 60 years, I guess. You'll suffer the most.

Call it Christ-likeness, or racial solidarity or a refusal to be swept away by herd gyrations.

What it is, is love and care.
There is ZERO in your views that is Christ-like.

This is where you are a liar. You have "compassion, love, kindness, and care" because he is white, he's a boy, and because you fantasize he's just like you. Your compassion is disingenuous. It's all about you.

It's the height of arrogance and delusion to claim your views are virtuous or Christ-like. Claiming to be Christ-like is the antithesis of it.

As for the virtue of your arrogance, one source pulled it together:

The words arrogance, arrogant, proud, and haughty are mentioned over 200 times in the NIV Bible. And in practically every occurrence, it is a behavior or attitude detested by God. The Bible tells us those who are arrogant and have a haughty heart are an abomination to Him: “Everyone who is arrogant in heart is an abomination to the Lord; be assured, he will not go unpunished” (Proverbs 16:5). Of the seven things the Bible tells us that God hates, “haughty eyes” [“a proud look,” NKJV] is the first one listed (Proverbs 6:16-19). Jesus Himself said, “What comes out of a person is what defiles him,” and then goes on to list the thirteen characteristics of those who are outside of God’s favor, with arrogance being considered alongside sexual immorality and murder (Mark 7:20-23).

There are two Greek forms of the word arrogance used in the New Testament, essentially meaning the same. Huperogkos means “swelling” or “extravagant” as used in “arrogant words” (2 Peter 2:18; Jude 1:16). The other is phusiosis, meaning a “puffing up of the soul” or “loftiness, pride” (2 Corinthians 12:20). It is incumbent upon believers to recognize that being arrogant or having a pompous attitude is antithetical to godliness (2 Peter 1:5-7). Arrogance is nothing more than an overt display of one’s sense of self-importance (2 Timothy 3:2). It is akin to that “it’s all about me” mindset that says, “The world revolves around me” (Proverbs 21:24).

Instead of arrogance, the Bible teaches us the opposite. In writing to the church in Corinth, Paul describes the love. Of the many facets of God’s love, arrogance is the reverse: “Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant” (1 Corinthians 13:4; cf. Romans 12:3). Being boastful and having that “I’m better than you” attitude reeks of intimidation and destroys our relationships with others. However, Jesus taught us to put others before self: “But whoever would be great among you must be your servant, and whoever would be first among you must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many” (Mark 10:43-45).

The apostle Paul echoed these same sentiments in his letter to the church in Philippi: “Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves” (Philippians 2:3). This is a vast contrast from the “dog-eat-dog,” competitive nature of our world today. The Christian’s behavior towards others should imitate that of Christ who taught us to wash one another’s feet (John 13:14). Where the world pushes us to strive to reach the top and says that “he who has the most toys wins,” Jesus commands us to be different: “For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted” (Luke 14:11; cf. James 4:6).

Regarding our attitudes towards God and our fellow-man, God gives us two promises. First, that the arrogant will be punished (Proverbs 16:5; Isaiah 13:11), and, second, “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:3). For, in truth, “God opposes the proud but gives grace to the humble” (1 Peter 5:5; cf. Proverbs 3:34).
(emphasis added)
 
It’s so bizarre(yet also terribly revealing) my humble request people show compassion and engage in some basic reflection gets conflated with glorifying the shooter.
You don't show compassion for nonwhites.
You don't show compassion for the 50% of white people who don't have a penis.
You don't show compassion for the white men who disagree with your retarded politics.

It's so terribly revealing that you only show compassion for whites who behave like niggers. "Dis boy dindu nuffin! He had a ruff childhood and shieet."
 
Back