jump to last post 1-5 of 5 discussions (5 posts)

Do you feel that extremism and venomousness rhetoric led to the Arizona shooting

  1. CarolineChicago profile image82
    CarolineChicagoposted 7 years ago

    Do you feel that extremism and venomousness rhetoric led to the Arizona shootings?

    I am pretty much a middle of the road, conservative Democrat and don't like the vicious, mud-slinging rhetoric that our politicians use. There are nut cases out there who might here things in such rhetoric as to do what the assassin on 1.8.11 did in Arizona. Do you feel that this could have been caused in part by the venom in today's politics? Do you feel it is a sign for not only politicians but people responding online to articles, commentary, etc. to watch what they say a bit more?

  2. nightwork4 profile image60
    nightwork4posted 7 years ago

    assasinations , crazy killers and sociopaths have been around since man began. i think that this shooting i another case of someone thinking they HAD to do this in order to stop someone they felt was horrible from living. this shooter  probably has a reason that he can justify to homself. this isn't new but with the internet and modern media , it is more sensationalized

  3. profile image0
    Longhunterposted 7 years ago

    The shootings were the product of a deranged mind. Nothing more. It's unconscionable that either side is using this tragedy for political gain or finger pointing.

    My heart goes out to all the families.

  4. Wayne Brown profile image85
    Wayne Brownposted 7 years ago

    You can only speculate on such a connection. Too often that speculation assumes that the perpetrator was a rational individual who suddenly decided to commit a horrid crime when in actuality this was an individual who probably has a history of off center behavior which has fallen short of mark to this point. This is also the type situation in which gun-control types want to blame guns for the problems brought on by unstable people. Such an assumption works on the basis that if guns were not available, this crime would not have happen. That's too much of a stretch. Those who elect to carry out a particular crime are not concerned with the law nor breaking it and they are not concerned about how they have to go about it.  Had it not been a gun, it could have just as well been a machete from the local pawn shop.  We have to quite blaming things and look to the people who perpetrate the behavior. Getting rid of guns will not reduce crimes or violence because when we give up our guns in the name of law and order, the criminals and those who support the criminals will still have theirs.  I don't want a would be criminal sitting in front of my house knowing that he can plan on breaking in and not facing a gun in the process. I want him to sit out there and think about and ask himself, "do I feel lucky....well do ya punk?" LOL! Thanks WB

  5. profile image0
    pcoachposted 7 years ago

    Caroline: May I first point out that you spelled "here" wrong.  That would be "hear".  As for an answer, the rhetoric has been and continues to be spewed by democrats who, interestingly enough, are the biggest complainers about the very same rhetoric they spew.  And how can anyone make a connection to any political "rhetoric" when it comes to Loughner?  Nothing found online or off lends a sane mind to say politics on either side of the aisle had anything to do with it.

Closed to reply