Pro-tip to all the aspiring mass shooters out there:
Kill guilty & knowing politicians/bankers/etc., not ignorant/innocent masses. One dead man with power causes infinitely more change than a hundred dead men with little power. If you're going to be murdering psychos, at least put that psychotic energy toward a useful cause.
You want an amazing example? Look up Otoya Yamaguchi and follow his example, not that of shitty daddy-issues school shooters.
Other urls found in this thread:
Based and red pilled. Target the cause, not the symptom.
I know people are gonna sperg on this.
But yeah, killing innocents immediately discredits your cause for most people.
Even though you're most likely never going to get normal people on your side, it's better if they sympathize with you more - it's also better if you're just the more honourable side.
It's not even about optics. It's about cause and effect. What helps your cause more, the other side's leaders/financiers all being dead or a few thousand dead foot soldiers (who may not even be aware they are foot soldiers)?
Basic logic, which of course escapes the psychotic. The psychotic always snap first. It is when the common man snaps that the tyrant truly begins to experience fear.
ok sam hyde
youtube.com
STOP KILLING PEOPLE
Why don't you take your own advice?
Or, kill the right people.
eternal problem finally solved by the hacker known as Jow Forums
Killing is not the only way to defeat an enemy. This thread is for those already on the razor edge.
Shit like this is what I'm terrified of. If we ever have an MLK level POC figure assassinated in the modern era it would be total fucking pandemonium. The US would never heal.
...expect the party van, anaon!
Precisely. But, and this a big BUT, they were also organized and attempted peaceful negotiation first (Olive Branch Petition). Random unorganized vagabond attacks were not what won the war, nor even what truly started it. It was a refusal of Great Britain to give in to the demands of The Colonials, and The Colonials refusing to give in to the demands of Great Britain, culminating in the battles of Lexington and Concord.
Republics only serve the interests of the wealthy. I would have preferred to remain with the Empire.
Please, I'm doing the feds a favor by saying this. Targeting men of power is far more difficult than killing random civilians because of fed/bodyguard protection, why do you think most shooter-fags choose the easy civvie-murder route?
And yet, look what the "empire" is now. Laughable, user.
if you go full vigilante on guilty politicians/bankers/etc then if your plan works they wont get their trial because they'd be dead, and if it doesn't work they can use being a victim to make them seem less guilty. dont do this stupid shit, it'll hurt any kind of movement in the works to get all the evidence on the assholes
ATTENTION FBI:
>Kill guilty & knowing politicians/bankers/etc
t. comey
At least the English have healthcare.
Yet, despite it supposedly being so much more difficult, there are so many examples of people simply walking up to the powerful man and shooting them dead where they stand, no sweat.
Funny how that works; it all depends on the time and place.
Everyone already knows who the guilty are. Believe you me, killing someone well known for being above the law amidst other scumbaggery will change much more than a mass shooting ever could.
>t-they won't get their trial
They forfeited their rights when they trampled on the rights of others.
>i-it'l hurt any kind of m-movement
Yet history proves you wrong. Kill a powerful enemy, you will not somehow become weaker for it.
t. Britbong on vacation/vpn
I like how you think user
Many mass murderers are probably psychotic and are largely emulating what they've seen on TV (shooting stuff like schools) rather than coldly calculating some idealogical and social reaction by picking the optimal target, so this post is for naught.
But, for those that still have their marbles and that would consider taking out some (((rich bankers))) or something for a better cause, the problem is probably logistics.
It's not hard to find a relatively unguarded mosque or church or school, scout it out ahead of time, and make a plan.
It's probably very hard to find out where and when somebody like George Soros will be ahead of time without being guarded.
I'm sure you could look up a schedule for somebody and figure out where one of their speaking events will be on some date. But you probably wouldn't get within 200 feet of them without having a metal detector go off or having a dozen security guards around.
See, that's what people think, but you'd be surprised at the human element of complacency. Sure there are guards, sure you have to check the event and go there while looking the part, but human complacency often ensures success.
Security guards do this all day every day, and most of the time, nothing happens. Exploit that natural human reaction of boredom, if you so choose.
Once again, look at the Robert Kennedy assassination, the Alfred Herrhausen assassination, and many others. They had people to protect them, and yet they were killed anyways.
The perfect time to strike is when the enemy is most at ease.
based
This of course is all predicated on the assumption that you aren't a fucking sperg who can't handle basic human interaction in a social setting, let alone stay relatively cool in the midst of a violent act.