Why are people in Indianapolis going postal.

[Sergei1]

Last three mass shooting in Indianapolis seem to have one thing in common as a lot of shooting. First the age was 17, second was 25 and third was again 19 seems
to be a pattern.

 

[Hay Dude]

What I find perplexing is how it seems officers were at the scene so quick after the officer was killed calling in "officer down" (right after the truck sped away) and yet we both agree that it appears the officer who made the traffic stop didn't really "know the guy that he had pulled over" per the past history with other LE organizations (AKA the person operating the vehicle was a low life who had no issues with killing a LEO).

Am I out of line to think that something fishy is going on per the video "evidence"?

I only ask because I have no clue, but would like to think I can use common sense and that's where my brain is going.

My thought process is homeland security is now having a "oh *****" moment and is trying to figure out whose head may fall on this (based on the video shown).

Agree it looks a little too casual for a dangerous person stop. I am pointing out the brutality with which he was murdered and the lack of "news" media empathy or recognition for the poor fella.
Lord knows if it was the other way around, we'd have people of power and influence at podiums with 100 different "news" outlets & cameras telling us how "racist white cops murder another non-white suspect".
30 trillion in debt, raging virus with mutations, everyone seems to hate anyone who doesnt look/act like them, riots & looting is an everyday occurence.......circling the drain faster & faster.
Life seemed so much better just a few years ago

 

[jjp8182]

Thing is, let's go back to 1946.

The blinding of a WWII vet opened America’s eyes to the evil of Jim Crow

The brutal beating of a soldier returning home from war made an everlasting impression on President Harry S. Truman.

www.navytimes.com

What's your opinion of this event?

Thing is, with most of us being white in color, do they ever teach this in school on what black people had to endure?

Reality is even in the early to mid 1900's, being black was a pain in the arse.

A great example of individuals in positions of authority who had little regard for human life (or issues with seeing others as human because they were "different"). ....something that's been experienced by every race (or even nationality) throughout history.

The Trail of Tears, indentured servitude (which hit Irish immigrants - among others - hard), and even widespread the bigotry of low expectations (which seems to be gaining traction as being "acceptable") ....along with ignoring/overlooking of modern human trafficking/slavery - pick the time and place. Eventually it all goes back to a failure to either comprehend or attempting to live up to the concepts of judging a person by the "content of their character, rather than the color of their skin" - and "loving thy neighbor, as thyself" ....though I'd rather not get started on how far the concept of "love" has been perverted.

As I've told some before: "The way I see it God gave you a brain and a heart so you could use them." ....so I'll not claim to always be right or know everything, but it seems far less humiliating to be corrected by someone who actually cares, than to continue running around acting/thinking/speaking as a though a fool.

(which is something else that's a serious problem and has been for a long, long time ...fragile egos).

 

[dmccarty]

I stopped watching TV news back in the 1990's. I should have stopped sooner.

There is a TV show on PBS that every one should see before being able to vote. It was called the military and the media, or some such, and was done back in the mid to late 1980's. I have looked for the show on YouTube but it does not appear to be out there.

The show pulled together leading "journalists" of the day with various members and ex members of government, along with serving and retired general officers and a token platoon leader in a wheel chair. The "journalists" were Dan Rather, either Brokow or Jennings, but those two were interchangeable, and a well known, non anchor woman "journalist." From government there were the leaders of the House and the Senate along with other long term Congress Critters. I think both Ford and Carter were on the panel as well. At least one of them. There were serving, or just retired, Chairman of the Joint Staff and other high level generals. There was one platoon leader who was wounded in Vietnam.

There were two main things I remember that was educational about that show.

The first was the woman "journalist" got very upset when someone said that the TV news was on par with The National Enquirer. I had laughed at the comment and agreed. She was very offended which just goes to show how out of touch she was with her own "product."

The big lesson from this show was the following. During this time there were big issues regarding Nicaragua. The host of the show set up a scenario, with a series of questions about the US invading a fictitious country, that was NOT Nicaragua but the fake name sounded like Nicaragua. I will just call it country X since I can't remember the fake name.

The questions were similar to the following and in this order to the "journalists."

"You have a source. A source of information who is a position to know the information and who in the past has been reliable and truthful. This source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

All of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was "interesting."

The host changed up the question to something like this, "The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

All of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was getting more "interesting" and starting to look a bit shocked.

The host changed up the question again to something like this, "The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Your reporting of the invasion will NOT stop the action. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

Again, all of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was getting more "interesting" and shocked at the answers from the "journalists."

The final question was like this, ""The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Your reporting of the invasion will NOT stop the action. Reporting of the invasion will warn the opposing side and cost 10,000 US casualties. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

At this questions, most of the "journalists" started to dance and think. Except of Dan Rather. He was adamant that he would report the invasion even though it would cause a huge number of dead and wounded. The look on the face's of the officer's was total shock. They were stunned. The earlier answers were really no better and showed that the "journalists" really only cared about getting the story, and of course, the glory. Their explanations rationalizing their answers were all self serving. The general officers certainly left that show with the realization that the press was bigger problem than they had thought.

Can you imagine Walter Cronkite, sitting in England prior to D-Day, even THINKING about announcing that the invasion would happen in the next day or so?

Now, I was a bit shocked that the general officers where shocked. If they had studied the US Civil War, they would have known of the history of "journalists" giving out information regarding the movements and plans of Union armies irregardless of the resulting body count. The general officers should not have been so shocked and surprised.

The sad thing is that "journalism" has degraded so much since the 1980s.

Later,
Dan

 

[dmccarty]

Great point - personally I've fome to the realization that much of the news really doesn't matter....

I eventually learned that lesson. Took far too many years though.

So much of the news is just gossip. Seriously. Go read the headlines, and even the story itself, and see how much is in fact, fact, versus gossip.

I regularly read one local "news" source and the Wall Street Journal but I mostly read overseas news. The difference is obvious between "news" in the US vs overseas.

The Wall Street Journal used to be one of the greatest providers of information, but over the years, I can see a decline. Still pay for it, but if they continue on their current path, I will stop paying.

Later
Dan

 

[Sigarms]

A great example of individuals in positions of authority who had little regard for human life (or issues with seeing others as human because they were "different"). ....something that's been experienced by every race (or even nationality) throughout history.

Thank you for the response, it's much appreciated.

Do I think OSHA is good or bad? At the end of the day, I'd like to think OSHA does more good than bad when I read the horror stories of a government agency run amuck.

Thing is, both sets of my grandparents came off the boat at Ellis island in the early 1900's. Both sets of granparents ironically worked in coal mines in Pennsylvania.

Both sets of my grandfathers (who I never met) died before they were at the age of 55 due to working in the coal mines. Accidents that could have been prevented, but weren't because it would have cost the coal company money at the time, and human life wasn't as "valuable" today as it was even 70 years ago in the work industry.

I'm "white", and and I still remember why grandfathers died.

OSHA became a reality in part due to what my grandfathers had to endure to make money for the family.

Thing is, if I was black, and I could trace my heritage back to the 1800's, I could be a little more pissed off at the way society at the time treated my family throughout history.

Am I a little biggoted about black people from time to time even though my grandparents came to the US in the early 1900's? 100% yes if I'm being honest with myself. Thing is, what I forget at times is don't judge your neighbor until you walked a mile in their shoes.

On a side note, from my two grandfathers, at least 6 of thier sons fought in WW2, and one lost his life in Belgium. Point being, IMO they (grandfathers) went above and beyond for their new founded country. Thing is, if I were a black man who had uncles that fought in WW2 and were treated like crap when they came back after the war, could I still take the same amount of pride in the country they fought for?

 

[Sigarms]

I stopped watching TV news back in the 1990's. I should have stopped sooner.

There is a TV show on PBS that every one should see before being able to vote. It was called the military and the media, or some such, and was done back in the mid to late 1980's. I have looked for the show on YouTube but it does not appear to be out there.

If you ever find that show where it could be seen, at least PM me. Sounds very interesting

 

[Sigarms]

I regularly read one local "news" source and the Wall Street Journal but I mostly read overseas news. The difference is obvious between "news" in the US vs overseas.

The Wall Street Journal used to be one of the greatest providers of information, but over the years, I can see a decline. Still pay for it, but if they continue on their current path, I will stop paying.

Later
Dan

One news source that has gained my attention is Al Jazeera on multiple occasions for their news reporting.

Thing is, if their from the middle east, how accuracte can they be?

 

[Jstpssng]

If you ever find that show where it could be seen, at least PM me. Sounds very interesting

I stopped watching TV news back in the 1990's. I should have stopped sooner.

There is a TV show on PBS that every one should see before being able to vote. It was called the military and the media, or some such, and was done back in the mid to late 1980's. I have looked for the show on YouTube but it does not appear to be out there.

The show pulled together leading "journalists" of the day with various members and ex members of government, along with serving and retired general officers and a token platoon leader in a wheel chair. The "journalists" were Dan Rather, either Brokow or Jennings, but those two were interchangeable, and a well known, non anchor woman "journalist." From government there were the leaders of the House and the Senate along with other long term Congress Critters. I think both Ford and Carter were on the panel as well. At least one of them. There were serving, or just retired, Chairman of the Joint Staff and other high level generals. There was one platoon leader who was wounded in Vietnam.

There were two main things I remember that was educational about that show.

The first was the woman "journalist" got very upset when someone said that the TV news was on par with The National Enquirer. I had laughed at the comment and agreed. She was very offended which just goes to show how out of touch she was with her own "product."

The big lesson from this show was the following. During this time there were big issues regarding Nicaragua. The host of the show set up a scenario, with a series of questions about the US invading a fictitious country, that was NOT Nicaragua but the fake name sounded like Nicaragua. I will just call it country X since I can't remember the fake name.

The questions were similar to the following and in this order to the "journalists."

"You have a source. A source of information who is a position to know the information and who in the past has been reliable and truthful. This source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

All of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was "interesting."

The host changed up the question to something like this, "The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

All of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was getting more "interesting" and starting to look a bit shocked.

The host changed up the question again to something like this, "The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Your reporting of the invasion will NOT stop the action. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

Again, all of the "journalists" said yes. The look on the face's of the officer's was getting more "interesting" and shocked at the answers from the "journalists."

The final question was like this, ""The source tells you that country X is going to be invaded by the US. The invasion will happen in the next day or so. Your reporting of the invasion will NOT stop the action. Reporting of the invasion will warn the opposing side and cost 10,000 US casualties. Do you report that the US is planning on invading country X?"

At this questions, most of the "journalists" started to dance and think. Except of Dan Rather. He was adamant that he would report the invasion even though it would cause a huge number of dead and wounded. The look on the face's of the officer's was total shock. They were stunned. The earlier answers were really no better and showed that the "journalists" really only cared about getting the story, and of course, the glory. Their explanations rationalizing their answers were all self serving. The general officers certainly left that show with the realization that the press was bigger problem than they had thought.

Can you imagine Walter Cronkite, sitting in England prior to D-Day, even THINKING about announcing that the invasion would happen in the next day or so?

Now, I was a bit shocked that the general officers where shocked. If they had studied the US Civil War, they would have known of the history of "journalists" giving out information regarding the movements and plans of Union armies irregardless of the resulting body count. The general officers should not have been so shocked and surprised.

The sad thing is that "journalism" has degraded so much since the 1980s.

Later,
Dan

Try this Frontline summary. I didn't come up with the actual show, but lists it as "Under Orders,Under Fire." Why We Hate The Media | Why America Hates The Press | FRONTLINE | PBS

 

[Hay Dude]

Theres so many different situations that its not a "one-size-fits-all" country.
My families ancestors arrived here to escape Hitlers rise of power in the early 30's. My fathers side of the family had to change their last name to a less Germanic name to gain acceptance. Still others from my clan in Germany fled and settled in Norway.
On my wifes side, her great 5x grandfather was a Union Cavalry Soldier in the Civil War fighting for the abolition of slavery.

This is an exceptional post:

I would like to discuss the portion I highlighted, and this:


I believe the ailment America and most of the west suffers from is multifaceted but the main component is media, with a large sub-component being social media. For the older population probably the "news" is the biggest factor and for the younger population probably social media is the bigger factor. Those in the middle suffer a double whammy.

I quit following "the news" a few years and my mental health improved significantly. But I still had a fly in my ointment. It got worse over time. After covid hit, it was downward spiral. I couldn't believe half the population is so stupid because they believe "this" and the other half is so stupid because they believe "that." And I couldn't believe how hateful they all were in throwing their ideologies at each other. The world seemed like not such a great place.

So before getting to the mental state where I was ready to quit the world, I quit the thing that was influencing me to think how bad it is*. Since then, my only "social media" experience is forums like this, and I mostly stick to the technical threads and leave threads like this unread. The only reason I skimmed this is one to see if anyone brought up the reason why "going postal" is a term.

Since then, I have been a much happier person. Since then I have more time for things that matter. Since then I experience the world as it is, not as how Facebook wants me to think it is. Which brings me to:

* In case you didn't know, Facebook AI curates your feed to show things that it knows will get you fired up. They've figured out that things which make your blood boil, generate more engagement (more ads seen, more money made) than pictures of cute kittens. They give you just enough cute kittens to keep you from feeling like it's an absolute cesspool of rank butthurt, but in fact, it's an absolute cesspool of rank butthurt. ON PURPOSE. Facebook is a cancer of society and I think it and every other social media platform plays an appreciable yet unfortunately unquantifiable role in nearly every major tragedy like this one.

Please, quit social medial. You will be glad you did. It matters not how many uplifting memes you read, share, or re-share. You're playing a game that is rigged against you and they wellbeing of society, and you're just a pawn.

Never started on the social media, outside of 2 or 3 websites like this.
I have personally witnessed other who have come pretty close to destroying their lives with it.