Framing the debate as guns vs no guns is ridiculous and seriously makes me reconsider my pro-gun position (much like potheads make me want to reconsider my pro-legalize drugs position). You can be pro-gun and still believe that there should be a system in place to screen who buys guns.

He is dead. That post was May 18th. So five days before the shooting spree.

timestamps, how do they work

Gun deaths are down 50% in the US over the last 20 years, this is raw numbers, when you factor in per capita the decline is even more dramatic as there has been substantial population growth over that time.

The public perception is that gun violence is at it's peak though, thanks to heavily covered high profile mass shootings.

http://www.kltv.com/story/25635541/g...ricans-unaware

Down to around 20,000 a year?

Well done

What's your point cotton?

The video where he was very explicit that he was going to kill people was not posted until just before he went out on a shooting spree.

The previous videos were disturbing but pretty much your typical rant that you'll get from any loser who can't get girls. Of those videos one did have some strong hints that he was contemplating violence and the result was that police and social services responded -- it appears his mother called the authorities. The part that gets confusing is that seven officers were sent which to me is implies they consider this fairly serious but he was able to talk his way out of it without the officers asking to look around. According to R.E. had the police gone into his room it would have been game over because he had material out which would have revealed his intentions. That is what led to him removing the videos. He re-posted the videos starting three days before the shootings with about half being the day before or day of. His manifesto was sent out just before he did this which led to his parents rushing to the the scene although by the time they arrived he was dead.

In addition while they didn't have specific knowledge that this would happen the two other people R.E. had any kind of relationship with knew this was the inevitable outcome. His friend James (also a WoW virgin) originally freaked out on him a couple of years ago because R.E. was always talking about his ****ed up revenge fantasies. That led to them not being friends for a bit. Eventually they started spending time together again and R.E. tried to keep his revenge fantasies to a minimum but he couldn't so after two more fights over why R.E. was crazy James completely cut him out of his life.

A second guy who wasn't really a friend but they hung out could also see it based on some of the comments. Even the YouTube comments from his videos people could see it. This was definitely something that could have been stopped. I don't think there was anyway to help R.E. but he could have been institutionalized since his behaviour certainly would have been sufficient to establish that he was a risk to himself and others.

Yes. This is his YouTube channel

https://www.youtube.com/user/ElliotRodger/videos

The only video that was removed by YouTube was the final video where he says he is going to kill people. That video is still available here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Asp7_yI0OIU

oldmanwithgunyellsatcloud.jpg

The funny thing is the host of this show is much more misogynistic than R.E. -- I had never heard of him but watching some of his videos and it is hilarious how ****ed up he is.

The video on R.E. I only got an hour in. He basically is mostly reading the manifesto and adding slightly misogynistic commentary while drawing in some additional info -- basically all I really learned was that there were semi-nudes of R.E.'s step-mom on R.E.'s dad's website and that there are some other R.E writings on the internet where he discusses his step-mom being an abusive disciplinary parent.

Where it got interesting is in the YouTub suggestions I noticed a lot of the videos were sexy women which seemed strange for a supposed philosophy channel. Clicked on those and it is your typical men's rights loser who thinks all women want his stuff (despite his complete lack of stuff) and basically all the typical BS these guys believe. His tone and the degree of absurdity of the **** he says makes you think this might be a spoof but it is real.

Molyneux doesn't have stuff? He makes some damn good videos on a lot of different subjects.

In the video he basically blamed the parents and people around RE.

Is switching his initials around and calling him RE some popular trend I'm not familiar with?

Having watched about six of Molyneux's videos they basically all had at their core a foundation in the belief that women are evil bitches trying to take men's stuff. His videos are very misogynistic and the reason he is funny rests completely in the fact that he is so pathetic.

Blaming the parents for ER's behaviour is pretty bad when overall they did a pretty good job of dealing with a ****ed up kid. People like Molyneux carry a much greater share of the blame for ER than his parents.

I did it my mistake.

Lolsample size?

Sample size is irrelevant -- once you go full ******ed like that nothing he can possibly say on other subjects can ever lead to recovery.

so you're saying women want to take his youtube videos?

Possible, his channel has been shut down before.

I wouldn't say blame. It was more of shedding background on the situation and viewing it from the perspective on how someone with a tremendous amount of issues already can react very badly to bad situations that normal people can certainly deal with better. I found it interesting that a lot of his ideas about entitlement to females seems to stem from the "ease" of his father picking up some hot actress chick after the divorce. Coming from the eyes of an autistic 7 year old, this has to be groundbreaking stuff, and he just had it stuck in his head.

To say his parents did a good job with him is pretty bad. Like when his stepmother joked with him that his little brother would get laid before him just is incredibly cruel. Or when his parents told him he was an accident. There's just a lot of really damaging stuff that occurred.

Whether or not Molyneaux's other videos are any good or not is simply ad hominem. I think the value of the video was from an informational perspective, and you can draw your own conclusions. There was a lot of blame to go around, starting most with Elliot Rogers. I think it does help explain his incredibly skewed perspective and how he arrived at it, though. That kind of thing is very interesting to me rather than just shoehorning him into an unexplainable monster.

Focusing on two negatives (I would add a third in that Dad never should have given him The Secret to read) hardly negates all the other things the parents did right -- constantly trying to push him into social integration, getting him all kinds of professional help, and calling the police on him when they realized he was going to do something. This is way and beyond what most parents would do.

If I point out that you don't know what ad hominem means that is not an ad hominem attack nor is pointing out that Molyneaux's absurd misogynistic views on women influence everything he talks about. Ten minutes into the video he is calling the step-mom a slut for posing for some semi-nudes despite that she is an actress and her husband who took them is a professional photographer.

The video (at least the first hour) is just a summary of the manifesto with some women hating and Molyneaux's anti-disciple child raising philosophy influencing greatly what he focuses on and thus what he leaves out. Because Molyneaux is so busy trying to pin this on the mothers he completely misses most of the important stuff.

This is absolute rubbish ....




This is spot on ...


I used to know someone who is really in to this Molyneux character, and I've watched quite A lot of his videos, unfortunately.

Stefan Molyneux does little m0re than generalize., and project. He was raised by an abusive mother, and that has completely shaped his unobjective, misogynistic world view. No matter what one of his caller's problems is, he always puts the blame of the situation on a woman. He is a victim blamer, blaming victimized women instead of abusive men. He's just an all around piece of ****. He's not a philosopher., he's not self aware, he's a childish misogynist.

Here is a quote


"There's a weird thing if you're a guy; if you're a guy, you don't get paid for having a dick. Fortunately, god do you want to be that kind of person? Be a vagina parasite that inhales wallets up her cooch without even crouching. Some sort of reverse vacuum cleaner that hoovers coins out of penises. That's not what you want right? You don't want to be that."

It's found in this disgusting video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pGLNeov2VM



**** that guy.

Best part about that was he was referring to the caller's mom and the guy's like, "I guess I never thought of it that way."

Shut up Jeremy you irritating little twerp

Instead of announcing to the world that he a loser and a virgin that cant even get a kiss from a girl, he should have just pretended to have a girlfriend like Henry17.