What the fuck is wrong with you?

How the fuck could you walk up to a toddler, a cute little 3 year old and shoot them point blank? What kind of a sick, heartless piece of shit are you to do something like this? Do you think you’re tough, to kill a young child at close range? It’s bad enough when gang shooters accidentally take a life of an innocent bystander child, but walking up to them and shooting them point blank in the chest… FUCK YOU!

16 Replies to “What the fuck is wrong with you?”

  1. You ask a question. The obvious answer relates to the abuse by ommission and commission accorded to the psychopath including theist indoctrination at a place of bullshit every Sunday.

    The question of greater interest is why such shit-on-legs are considered entitled to the rights of men. Why are those of them who have not shot themselves not shot? The answer is that 50% of population at least are treacherous, vile, loony-left softie poseurs thinking themselves frightfully righteous to forgive.

    A further question comes to mind: Why are the poserus not shot? Answer: because this is not China. Roll on Sino-domination of planet Earth. They know which end shit comes out of the cow. cyquick.wordpress.com

  2. Hate to get political on this, but why do these things happen in overwhelmingly Democrat places by people who don’t think twice about voting for Democrats? How come incidents involving the coldblooded shooting of a three-year old are done on and committed by Democrats? Combine with low fertility rates and prediliction towards homicide, no wonder there will be very few progressives left.

  3. Though the suspect is still at large apparently WestwoodNC either has some sort of access to the political party to which the fiend is registered, or he’s just plain whacktarded.

  4. No, WestwoodNC is correct in that most urban areas are largely Democrat, and thus less likely to face criminal activity with an iron fist.
    However, the reality is that an insane amount of money is constantly being spent by “fiscally conservative” Republicans in places other than our own backyards.
    If Republicans were to put as much passion and supposed compassion into fixing our gang problems, which stem from poverty and poor education, as they do in “spreading Democracy”, perhaps they’d have a better chance of getting the votes in these gang and crime infested areas.
    Unfortunately, the “war on terror” means more votes, so they take the easy route, ignore their own country, and then complain when more money is asked to be spent on education and social programs.

  5. Any place/persons who vote Democratic vote for Democratic politicians that would implement Democratic policies. So after decades of loyalty by their constituents, decades of placing them in various political offices, it’s quiet obvious that Democrats “anti-gang” policies are either a failure or most likely, nonexistent. We know a Republican’s antigang policy, you may not like it and it’s efficacy debatable, but we just know and it certainly predates the Iraq War. As the midterm election comes around and American voters, especially the ones in South LA are ready to do their duty of putting Democrats in power, it’s disconcerting to see that it’s done not much because the party have an antigang policy but to suitup for the tit-for-tat partisan war that seem to benefit rich white men at the top. I wish those who are slavishly attached to the Democrats demand actual policy solutions for the places and voters that showed near-mindless loyalty over the years. Just am I’m about to fall out from the GOP (many many reasons why), I step back and consider that the alternative is a dispiriting party of monomaniacs and pessimists whose vision for a great powerful country was inseparable from its policies. But it has no vision, no policies. Somehow that’s better than Bush…and all of you would agree to that.

  6. I think any anti-gang policy will hopefully be free of partisan bullshit, yet take ideas from both sides. More cops, stricter sentencing, zero tolerance, combined with plenty of money in the social sector, etc.

    As for scumbag mentioned by eecue, I don’t think he’ll last on the streets long. Shooting a child is not something even the most ruthless of gangs would tolerate. I imagine this guy will end up with a bullet in his head before the cops find him – local justice.

  7. Not quite sure how it was extrapolated that I was disputing WestwoodNC’s assertion that urban areas are largely democrat. I was challenging his assumption that the suspect himself is specifically one. I just don’t get a sense of that maggot ever taking the time to register to vote.

  8. PS

    The gangs exist because of Prohibition. Repeal Prohibition and institute Intelliegent Regulation with pure stuff sold in registered stores (with health facts on show) and no extreme wealth can be made. Therefore the ruthless criminal type walks away into another business. As with Alcohol Prohibition, Repeal will not dissolve the gangs but it will render them gradually ever less potent. There is NO way the “drugs war” can be won by ratchetting up the violence of police. Repeal is the only Deal. cyquick.wordpress.com

  9. In response to WestwoodNC:

    1. Correlation is not the same thing as causation. Just because X and Y occur at the same time does not mean that X causes Y.

    2. I have not seen the link between violent crime and party politics. Without that link, your statements are a nonsequitur. It’s like saying that because people in urban areas purchase more sneakers than cowboy boots, there is more violence.

    3. You have to look beyond the false dichotomy of Republican and Democrat and investigate the real situations and policies that might have something like this happen.

    4. As compelling as this case is, it is but a single data point.

  10. Anyone else notice that Westwoo’s alias ends in “DNC” . . . .

    Democrats represent turbulent inner-cities because the Reeps moved out to their comfy ‘burbs when they made their first million and could build communities with gates high enough to keep out the riff raff.

    No, I don’t believe it’s that simple. But the politicizing you do here is unreasonable.

  11. I’d like to take credit for politicizing this rant by mentioning the war in Iraq! WestwoodNC just took the bait…
    That said, I don’t think his view is off base, not do I think he necessarily disagrees with anyone else here.
    Point is both parties aren’t handling the inner city gang and crime issue very well.
    My point is that an insane amount of money has been tossed into the desert – if a fraction of that amount was used for additional police and social programs, I’m certain we’d see a noticeable difference in the safety of our own cities.

  12. FNC today reported that 40% of police in Mexico are now in pay of the drug thugs, who control the border, not the perceived panacea: the fancy democratic government; politicians not far behind. Yet still the media, politicians, and voters fail to see that Prohibition is the problem. It is a competition between two enemies as to which will bring down The West first: the you know who, and the drugs lords. The longer establishment fools ponce around in denial the more violent will be their eventual lashback as they finally twig the anti-you-know-who and repealers were not racist or insane, we were correct. cyquick.wordpress.com

Comments are closed.