Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Xelor, Jun 14, 2017.
If nothing else, he was just an asshole who took his politics a bit too seriously.
No great loss.
I'm a professional, but not the type whereby matters such as the one under discussion in this thread fall within my areas of expertise.
If this was a trump supporter, would the OP still be the same?
There is no need here to argue semantics. In the unmodified version of my OP, I clearly and explicitly called attention to the distinction between "hurt" and "kill."
Insofar as I did make that distinction, it's not reasonable for anyone to think anything other than that you (1) as I alluded to before, don't know the difference between "hurt" and "kill" or (2) you meant "hurt."
If you're not a professional who has legitimately expert insights to offer, well, I'm not interested in what you think was in the man's mind or why you think it.
The rest of the posters here may have ignored you, but I am pouting. Just so you know.
You didn't answer my questions.
Good thing he wasn't a good shot. Sometimes the stress of the situation along with Capitol Police returning fire creates erratic shots
You are trying to sound so smart that you are being annoying.
Enjoy your downplaying of terrorism. Good day
Did he intend to kill? Or just hurt people?
Are you fucking kidding?
This is why I encourage liberals to abort their children or just go queer.
I would think that so for the later shots rather than for the earlier ones.  How much later? How much earlier? I don't know. That would have a lot to do with a lot of situationally specific details and details about Hodgkinson's arms training and experience, details that I don't have, and that may not be made public.
Recognizing there may forever (for me) be that dearth of information, is part of why my inquiry is about what the behaviors are consistent with a shooter's intending to injure rather than kill, and vice versa. One must know and understand the relevant behavioral theory before examining what of the shooter's observed behaviors align with it and which of them do not. With the theoretical "ideal" behavioral model of killing vs. injuring intentions as the baseline, the question, then, the point of my OP inquiry, can be thought of in terms of how near or far from that baseline are the shooter's behaviors.
I realize that what I'm pursing is a structured approach to obtaining answers to my questions, but that's how do things. I don't, when it's not necessary, answer questions by going with gut feelings based on serendipitously gathered anecdotal information.
As I wrote this, audio (video) of the shots fired came over the news. The first three shots almost certainly seem to have clearly gone unanswered by security and first responders returning fire. The next set of shots, four or so, came in rapid succession, but I cannot tell from what type of weapon they were fired.
I did, actually. What came to mind is that adrenaline tends to ameliorate one's performance in high-stress situations by "synchroniz[ing] the mind and body to take on the stresses of the outside world." If anything, that suggests to me that the man was more likely to be a better shot than a worse one.
Separate names with a comma.