hanikrummihundursvin
No bio...
User ID: 673
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
But then the dad allegedly tells a member of the clergy who then notifies the authorities, according to the article.
hanikrummihundursvin
4d ago
Two law enforcement sources tell CBS News, the BBC's US partner, Tyler Robinson's father relayed his son's confession to a clergy member - the family friend we heard about earlier.
That clergy member took the tip to the US Marshals Service, and then Robinson was detained.
Is this allowed from a religious standpoint? Beyond that, would the shooter have gotten away with it if not for yapping to his dad, or his dad yapping to a clergy member?
hanikrummihundursvin
6d ago
His twitter engagement is pretty insane. Having many haters does not necessarily mean you're not popular.
It's not so much the switch that rusted off, more that it is routinely glued stuck to make sure it can not be flipped. This is done by 'conservatives' and the like for various reasons. Be that their own comfortable lives they want to keep safe for themselves, or a complex set of responses to being completely out of control with regards to media and power. So they instinctively know that sticking their neck out in support of anything will lead to it getting chopped off. To that extent the drive people have to glue the switch stuck can be summed up as greed and cowardice.
hanikrummihundursvin
6d ago
The bystander effect is a fake and gay meme.
The only valid presumption to be made by anyone who has watched the murder in question is that every single person there outside of the victim is a subhuman. Maybe they were born that way, maybe they were radicalized by media, or maybe it's a combination of both! But the display speaks for itself.
hanikrummihundursvin
6d ago
White Americans, outside of some ~5-10%, have for decades made it their sole raison d'être to denounce white identity, identity politics and collective action in general if they in any way believe that its purpose is to advantage their own group.
To that extent there will never be a reversal of roles since that's what's been worked towards. So I have a very hard time understanding how people who aren't literal white ethnocentrists of some stripe can say this or what they hope to accomplish by saying it.
hanikrummihundursvin
15d ago
I agree with all of these. But my principle issue with the M7, for example, is that all of those things you mention as possible improvements, are being done... wrong. The gun is heavy, smaller magazine capacity, heavier ammo, and questionable sighting capabilities if you are fighting anything other than third world technology.
To the extent that improvements can be made to already heavily optimized gunpowder small arms, they would have been much better represented by something like the RM277. Longer barrel, lighter ammo, less recoil. Sure, it's not an AR. But that would be my point regarding incentives. The fact that something is not a brass fed AR is practically an automatic disqualifier.
hanikrummihundursvin
16d ago
It feels like the firearms industry is in a boring place of a lack of incentives to drive innovation. From that perspective SIG winning out the NGSW trials was very disappointing.
I appreciate the reply, though it is tiresome to have the position I just argued against explained to me as if I just didn't know, understand or wasn't addressing it before. Then seeing all the arguments I just argued against... Eh.. Let me give you some examples to judge for yourself.
To begin with, the possibility of a better outcome does not change the fact that environments are heritable and there is no omnipotent hand ready to steer children away from criminal parents to minimize their chances of criminality. This is why I said that people have to be able to live with other people. Asserting that there was technically a chance to environmentally pacify someone with Brunner syndrome does not change the fact that they have Brunner syndrome whilst others do not. And whilst Raja doesn't have Brunner syndrome, he does seem to have a higher propensity towards violence than average. To that extent you are not arguing anything about genetics or environment, just asserting that with omnipotence we could change some outcomes. Well, I don't disagree, but we don't have omnipotence. So with what does that leave us?
As a second example, when I say bad parenting doesn't fall from the sky, and you reply with the assertion that it is cultivated over generations, I am left perplexed. How does that answer where it comes from? And if it persists over generations, what exactly are the conditions that produce and maintain it? Like, you are asserting a theory of psychology and sociology that, if true, should be extremely well studied and have very clear and visibly interactable effects. Are the results of adoption studies really so definitive in that direction? As far as I remember, children of criminal parents adopted into non criminal families still have higher rates of criminality. So we are at making the best of a sub-average situation in the hopes that it won't metastasize into something worse again?
When I see these arguments all I can think of is: How? How will anyone do this or enforce what you are proposing? You are taking a hypothesized maximum potential of people and asserting that the genetic component is negligible because in a hypothesized scenario most everyone could be raised to be a good person if removed from their inherited environment and have all negative impulses stifled somehow. My point would be that we don't live in such a world. Instead we live in a world were the Rampage Jacksons of the world can raise their own children and freely express whatever impulses they have. And my argument relies on that world being our point of comparison. Because despite all the excuses made for violent blacks, there are so many people who have lived hard lives, had few opportunities, been used and abused, and never once been close to expressing the type of sub-humanism displayed by Raja.
hanikrummihundursvin
17d ago
Whenever the rubber meets the road I feel like I see posts like these.
Yes, 'genetics' is the entire story. There is no moderate racialist camp. Bad parenting doesn't fall out of the sky by chance. And the bad parents don't keep their bad genes to themselves.
Technically we could take someone with Brunner syndrome and, through manipulating their environment, make sure they never have the need to violently express themselves. But that's if we are omnipotent. We're not. No ones life flows flawlessly. There are always moments that call on violent reactions. What separates the wheat from the chaff is how a person responds to these stimuli.
People have to be capable of living in the real world with other people. If they fail that it's not a matter of 'could would should' on behalf of everyone else to coddle these people into not being violent retards. Raja is 25 years old. He should be way past the point of pining for his fathers approval and attention like a dog. And way way past needing to hospitalize another person to do it.
Just think about what kind of an insurmountable failure you would have to be to express yourself like Raja did. At no point did his brain go 'nah, I'll just not do this because attempted murder is bad' or 'I'll probably get arrested' or 'that man apologized to me so it's ok' or 'he probably has friends and family'. None of that.
What Raja did is not the reaction of a fully grown man, if we use the average white person as a comparison. This is the brain of a child in a grown mans body. Which is, as you've mentioned, very similar to his father.
hanikrummihundursvin
17d ago
There are plenty of people who have harsh upbringings who don't turn out to be violent retards. There are also people who inherit their parents violent genes and are much more likely to become violent retards despite good upbringing.
Everything is 'about race' because there is no environment without genetic expression happening within it. Black people as a group in America are a lot more prone to violence than whites or asians. This event falls within that context and is therefor a part of that wider pattern.
Beyond that fact this is not a matter of personal opinion. But if we were to put our own spin on it, I'd argue that the post-attack rant by Raja exemplifies exactly what kind of person he is and the characteristics of many young violent people: Self centered, egotistical, lacking in empathy and willing to express their emotions through physical acts of violence without any intervening thought for what comes next after assaulting a human being.
On top of that you have the typical black tribalism on display. With black former WWE star Mark Henry making mealy mouthed excuses for the incident on behalf of Raja. Raja being a 25 year old adult with experience in combat sports, who knowingly and willfully punched a human being into a coma, and gave them serious brain damage.
There is always a reason to engage with reality.
hanikrummihundursvin
27d ago
It feels like we are trying to push a square peg through a round hole, so long as scientists are people and not robots.
Having gone through a long journey of internet atheism, towards 'Skepticism' as a sort of general outlook to fill in the void that a lack of coherent belief system creates, I was left, like many, very unimpressed by my fellow atheists, skeptics and scientists in general insofar as they were represented by science popularizers. I did not find anything similar to Less Wrong during this time, but was left to trudge through the mud of Skeptic drama, power tripping feminist moderators and such. Atheism+ came along with a bang and every foot soldier of internet atheism and skepticism turned from making mountains out of molehills, where the actions of some pastor in the middle of nowhere did or said something silly, towards tearing each other apart over small ideological differences. These were the same people who scoffed at the silly religious people who start wars over inconsequential differences in scripture...
Now, that's just the rabble beneath the 'Science'. It included a lot of professors and scientists, sure, but it also included a lot of nobodies. But this was the population group that had, for at least a decade, labored under the delusion that they were in some way different from the rest. With science, reason and rationality as their shield. Turns out they very much weren't any of that to any extent that mattered.
But, again, this is the rabble. The scientists themselves, surely, are better. Right? Well, as you say yourself, they kind of aren't. And better men than me or you have long made that observation. Turns out they are very much human like everyone else.
To that end I'd argue the kind of 'scientist' you seem to pine for would probably make for a terrible person in any other aspect of life. Good people don't constantly have to evaluate base truths. Wallowing in self doubt over whatever facet of their life they happen to re-evaluate today, to not fall prey to bias or whatever, whilst potentially destroying key aspects of their life in the process.
Further than that, I'd say that if you ever want to colonize Mars, the last thing you need is science. As you can't hope to achieve such a lofty goal without true believers who hold not doubt in their heart towards their task but unshakeable faith and enthusiasm. Lest you end up with another 'Whitey on the Moon' paradigm.
As far as my mind can see, if we were to form any sort of realistic framework that could facilitate this goal of veneration and exploration for science, physics and space, we are working towards a chauvinistic European and/or East Asian supremacism. Any other population groups and any other concerns that don't functionally establish such authority are doomed to fall prey to everything we've seen trip up science so far. Though I welcome any thoughts to the contrary.
In conclusion, it seems that if one loves science, one should learn to love politics first.
Of course, with Da Jooos, there's always some genius like Shaun King to get things started.
I think it would be more fair to say, despite any conspiracy and maximally antagonistic JIDF posting, that the guy who started this is the guy who got himself arrested in America on account of luring a child to have sex with him and the fact that the same man is now free as a bird in Israel and not trapped in a small concrete box in Nevada.
It certainly does not help the JIDF case in this matter that the person ultimately responsible for his release, whether they were actually involved or not, is an Israeli born Jew and alleged zionist. Along the with the District attorney allegedly being jewish as well. Though that may all be besides the point.
The 'conspiracy angle' between this and Epstein is not known to me, and I don't see it being false as a relevant point to anything Joo related in totality, as there is still a long and ugly history of nasty jewish pedophiles making use of their jewishness to evade justice. This just seems like another example of that ugly reality which is allowed to persist for reasons the JIDF posters are sure to be able to rationalize away as perfectly coincidentally natural.
hanikrummihundursvin
30d ago
Considering what's on display, it doesn't seem very complicated to boss them around. As they look to be captive by the same process that most others are captive by. The belief is that the ingroup needs to sacrifice to make amends with the outgroup.
People who hold this belief feel it is their moral right to sacrifice other peoples children to make the bigger picture come together. And considering it has been decided as an economic policy to move vast amounts of third world browns around, and Europe has built a justice system based on European peoples and their comparatively more peaceful and redeemable criminals, what else is there for these judges to do? Just like the government and journalists in Sweden who hide the knowledge of race based crime statistics from the public in the name of solidarity and progress. It's literally the only play that makes sense when holding oneself to egalitarian priors.
Judges being people doesn't seem to be a problem at all. It actually looks like a perfectly functioning limb of an unassailable system that one can't be against without being literally Hitler.
hanikrummihundursvin
30d ago
I don't see the connection between 'being a person' and therefor automatically being inclined to give foreign rapists light sentences.
To me it doesn't seem reasonable or humane, just cowardly and sick. Being so wrapped up in and simultaneously so blind to ones own twisted moral intuition that it becomes practically impossible to differentiate between the person raping a 15 year old and the person calling them a pig is not 'normal'.
I think it would be a lot more pertinent for people like this to examine their state of mind and how it has managed to drive them towards results such as this. But it seems like we've managed to build an impervious wall that keeps people away from exploring the true extent of the problem and just what feeds these 'outgroup sycophants' to do what they do.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
There are more pieces to the puzzle. And whilst it might be easy to throw together a few negative connections and proclaim everyone is 'just like the creationists' it just so happens that everyone is also not like that, depending on context.
For one, SIG has been on a long downward trend in the gun sphere. Complaints of poor quality control can be found online going back to 2013 and further. On top of that, SIG gets awarded a military contract allegedly based on low price. Pushing forward a pistol that is not drop safe.
To go from 'High Quality Swiss-German, Made in Eckernförde, Germany' to 'Low quality and cheap, Assembled in Newington, New Hampshire, parts from wherever' is a big change.
To that extent this is more a protest than a cult. At some point SIG managed to devalue its name, through whatever means, to a point where people feel the need to vent about it. SIG was good, now it's bad. Things didn't used to be like this. Now they do.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
There has to have been a board meeting where the suit and ties timidly navigate around the need of appealing more to their awkwardly large coomer market.
It's just... Somehow with all the talk of hope centered around AI technology and human flourishing there sits a big nasty tumor called 'masturbation'.
Yudkowsky might have been right after all, just for the wrong reasons. It's not the flesh eating nanobots but the 2D waifus that need to be nuked.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
So much for meme history.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I'm sure there is a based tradcath out there somewhere who can contextualize all of these follies of the modern world within the disaster that is the sexual revolution, but 'drastic' age gaps were, as far as my meme understanding of history goes, more common back in the day.
But regardless of that, a part of the issue has to be the lack of a centralized authority that decides on this. Allowing everyone to recognize what the parameters are so that they can at least not claim ignorance of how the dating scene works and where they fall on the value curve.
My question would be, would that change be a good thing? Would that information change peoples behavior at all?
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
The age thing, whilst more viscerally nasty, is probably not the sole reason for why Epstein and friends are looked at so negatively.
The idea of an upper class that lives voraciously lavish lives, engaging in all manner of depravity and indulgence, is pervasive in history and fiction. I don't think there is a single example where people look at these behaviors positively.
To that extent, whilst one might have to make more nuanced arguments against Epstein and friends on those grounds, the argument is there. Epstein and the people going to parties on private islands were doing something shameful and ugly even without the child rape trafficking.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
No, not what sounds good vs what is effective. Most of these problems have no proven actionable solutions. From race to homelessness. And often times the problems are linked. The problems are also woven into the moral fabric of progressive ontology that came out of the older 'classical liberal' world.
That goes double for when we are operating within the parameters of what progressive voters will allow to fly or what can actually pass a human inspection. It's all well and good for us here talking about graphs and whatnot, but these debates have been had in the spheres where they matter. Turns out you can't be taken seriously as a classical liberal in civilized society if your answer to the moral impetus that drives progressives forward is bold faced racism or a confident 'welp'.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
From a progressive standpoint, you're not looking at successful systems in hopes of further maximizing efficiency. You are looking for solutions to problems. Expensive projects with dubious results might look economically silly, but the need for them arises from a want. For example, after hearing that a local homeless person froze to death or something. 'We need to do something' always sounds better than 'welp'.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
Eh, I'd think of it more in terms of if an attractive looking woman is hitting on you, you don't need agency.
Also, I'm sure wealthy men are going for young women. Just not marrying them. To that end I'm not sure if the data is demonstrating that recently married men are getting married to parity partners or if these parity partners have been an item for a long time. It would certainly match my experience of people meeting in university.
hanikrummihundursvin
1mo ago
I'm inclined to agree with you. There is 'hatred' in many nations regarding past wars. But that's between nations.
To change perspectives, how one can say they are part of a group with a righteous feeling of anger, fear and vengeance against another national group whilst still claiming to be an equal national to that group strikes me as peculiar. Similar to how some advanced progressive/liberal/leftists manage to order their politics in such a way that brown people can do no wrong.
It is necessarily the case by dint of these emotions that there is a difference. How one would categorize or order that difference is up for debate, but that's where it starts.
I'm not fully aware of the nuance here. So the context of when and where matters? You can't just call and 'confess' over the phone?
More options
Context Copy link