EPTIf you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11971 Posts
| ||
|
riotjune
United States3394 Posts
On January 07 2019 01:37 Simberto wrote: That sounds like you regularly see people beat each other up. Is that something that people experience a lot of? Because i am quite certain that i have never seen a legitimate fight in my life. The worst i have experienced was some play-fighting in the school yard in 6th or 7th grade, but punches or kicks were basically taboo, so it usually involved trying to get some kind of painful arm hold, and was never really serious, more along the lines of teenage boys (who were all kind of friends) figuring out stuff. It seems from posts like yours that there is this whole world out there where it is completely normal that people beat each other to a pulp all the time, and i have just never intersected with it. This was back when I was in San Antonio, near several military installations. If you go out drinking in the city you're going to run into soldiers/airmen from the Army and Air Force, who hate each other for some reason. Whenever the two branches cross paths in a bar, you're bound to see a fight break out. I wouldn't call them normal people per se, but they can get pretty rowdy, especially when you throw alcohol into the mix. Anyway I don't drink nor hit the bars often anymore, but wouldn't be surprised if brawls still happen all the time. Just this past New Year's our local police arrested like a dozen people. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
On January 06 2019 02:44 GreenHorizons wrote: There are a lot of fights at McDonald's could you be more specific? McDonald's definitely needs better worker protections though, that much is clear. It was a long time ago. In fact I think it was you that posted it. At the time everyone was arguing whether it was right or wrong for the man to defend himself in that manner, but no one thought it was wrong for McDonalds to fire him but I. The point I am making is that the culture of USA is that a person working in a lower class job is normally expected to not defend themselves, and the only thing that creates support and protecting this woman from being fired is the optics of her and the assailant's physical looks and stature. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24338 Posts
On January 07 2019 22:05 Dangermousecatdog wrote: It was a long time ago. In fact I think it was you that posted it. At the time everyone was arguing whether it was right or wrong for the man to defend himself in that manner, but no one thought it was wrong for McDonalds to fire him but I. The point I am making is that the culture of USA is that a person working in a lower class job is normally expected to not defend themselves, and the only thing that creates support and protecting this woman from being fired is the optics of her and the assailant's physical looks and stature. That's pretty much US politics in a nutshell. The only thing that can protect you from assailants physical or economic is an identity and story that resonates with the public. Even that tends not to really be enough either in the long run. If we wanted to get fancy we could see how being defenseless at a shitty job where you're unappreciated and people don't think you deserve to have a family and time to share love with them might have something to do both with people shooting up public places and turning guns on themselves (as well as drunken fistfights over petty shit). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
| ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On January 10 2019 02:35 micronesia wrote: It looks like the dog accidentally turned off the safety, accidentally pointed the gun at a hunter, and accidentally pulled the trigger. This was a freak accident and risk you accept when you bring pets with you while handling guns. Only other lesson learned I can think of is to not put a loaded gun down on a surface your dog is likely to climb on. It's like one of the 5 golden rules and would surely be part of the training you guys all aren't required to have: Do not put down a loaded gun. It's not so much a freak accident as much as it was negligence. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Similar comment to others. Don’t set down loaded weapons to go off and do other things. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
On January 10 2019 02:56 Excludos wrote: It's like one of the 5 golden rules and would surely be part of the training you guys all aren't required to have: Do not put down a loaded gun. It's not so much a freak accident as much as it was negligence. That is not a golden rule in any list I have seen. They should unload the guns if they are not actively hunting, though. Not clear how much they violated that golden rule without being there to see it. | ||
|
Excludos
Norway8278 Posts
On January 10 2019 04:26 micronesia wrote: That is not a golden rule in any list I have seen. They should unload the guns if they are not actively hunting, though. Not clear how much they violated that golden rule without being there to see it. The 5 (+1) golden rules I learned was (badly translated by yours truly): 1. Never pick up a weapon, yours or someone else's, without immediately checking if it's loaded (The extension of this I've seen around is just simply: Never pick up someone else's gun, let them check it themselves and hand it to you) 2. Never put down a loaded gun 3. Never aim at anyone, unloaded or otherwise 4. Never treat a weapon as if it's not loaded 5. A rifle can kill at a range of 3500m to 4000m (Basically a reminded to never point a loaded weapon up into the air, as bullets tend to come down again) 6. There is no excuse for accidental discharge Now to be fair, some of these are more specific to the rifle (G3) we used in the army back then. A lot of rifles surely aren't going to have a range of 4k. However the gist is the same I've learned everywhere, be it at a pistol club, or hunting course, or in the army. Just treat your weapon as if it could always go off and you're generally good to go as far as accidental discharges goes. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
"The Davis police department has been hitting me with ultra sonic waves meant to keep dogs from barking. I notified the press, internal affairs, and even the FBI about it. I am highly sensitive to its affect [sic] on my inner ear," the letter reads. "I did my best to appease them, but they have continued for years and I can't live this way anymore." The letter is signed "Citizen Kevin Limbaugh." https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/13/us/davis-police-officer-corona-sonic-waves-letter/index.html | ||
|
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
Maybe even the “importance of all American citizens’ right” to defense is reflected in the importance found is this mans situation of defense. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On January 14 2019 04:23 micronesia wrote: What is your point? People with guns do stupid shit, kill other people, and we are talking about it; basically the whole point of the thread is my point. The post before about the dog shooting the owner in the leg... The whole myth that guns help more than hurt society. People on this thread who support gun ownership in America often trumpet the idea that guns are necessary for self defense. The person in this article was clearly someone who held those beliefs and acted on a delusion. Clearly there is a substantial portion of the population that is incapable of safely carry guns and everyone else pays for it with their lives and feelings of safety. I'm mostly venting at the absurdity, but if I need something more... Here's my point more concisely, I don't believe citizens with guns make America safer or a better place. To the contrary, I think they make it more dangerous and less safe. Did you read the article? The following are also opinions/observations of mine on this situation. This guy had a gun for self-defense. A police officer (not at all associated with his delusion) randomly gets killed and we are all less safe because of it. Someone with some serious mental illness is also dead, rather than helped. If he had a family, they are all also suffering. The family of the police officer is suffering... Anything under that umbrella. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On January 14 2019 04:50 Danglars wrote: “Whatever the threat” makes a parallel between this mans perceived threats and the threats other Americans arm themselves to defend against. Maybe even the “importance of all American citizens’ right” to defense is reflected in the importance found is this mans situation of defense. There is a parallel, they are both perceived threats. Few threats are more than a perception. It is human nature to constantly attempt to perceive threats, so that we can survive. We are all wired that way. But society has progressed to the point that our "threats" are more perception than something that will ever materialize. The portion of the population that will ever own a gun and rightfully use it to defend themselves from a legitimate threat is much smaller than the portion of the population that is harmed to killed by the large influx of guns in our country. I don't understand your second point. | ||
|
micronesia
United States24799 Posts
On January 14 2019 04:57 ShambhalaWar wrote: As of this point in your post, I still don't get what your point was. It seems like you just wanted to post something and let it speak for itself.People with guns do stupid shit, kill other people, and we are talking about it; basically the whole point of the thread is my point. The post before about the dog shooting the owner in the leg... The whole myth that guns help more than hurt society. People on this thread who support gun ownership in America often trumpet the idea that guns are necessary for self defense. The person in this article was clearly someone who held those beliefs and acted on a delusion. This neither indicts nor supports the trumpeted idea.Clearly there is a substantial portion of the population that is incapable of safely carry guns and everyone else pays for it with their lives and feelings of safety. How is this clear? I would agree there was clearly one person who was incapable to safely possess guns. Unless you are speaking generally, but your previous post was not speaking generally.I'm mostly venting at the absurdity, but if I need something more... Here's my point more concisely, I don't believe citizens with guns make America safer or a better place. To the contrary, I think they make it more dangerous and less safe. I think this can be a good argument. Your previous post did not really state or imply it.Did you read the article? Yes I read it when you first posted it.The following are also opinions/observations of mine on this situation. This guy had a gun for self-defense. A police officer (not at all associated with his delusion) randomly gets killed and we are all less safe because of it. Someone with some serious mental illness is also dead, rather than helped. If he had a family, they are all also suffering. The family of the police officer is suffering... Anything under that umbrella. This does seem to be an argument for further screening of gun owners for mental illness as well as providing more services to the mentally ill to help them. | ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On January 14 2019 10:14 micronesia wrote: As of this point in your post, I still don't get what your point was. It seems like you just wanted to post something and let it speak for itself. This neither indicts nor supports the trumpeted idea. How is this clear? I would agree there was clearly one person who was incapable to safely possess guns. Unless you are speaking generally, but your previous post was not speaking generally. I think this can be a good argument. Your previous post did not really state or imply it. Yes I read it when you first posted it. This does seem to be an argument for further screening of gun owners for mental illness as well as providing more services to the mentally ill to help them. I will say that sometimes my posts don't really have much of a point other than venting or complaining about what I read in the news so frequently, and having to deal with the societal impacts of gun violence in America. Sometimes I'm just throwing out something sarcastic out of frustration, and that was part of the case here. Nobody is on trial here, but article like this illustrate how motives of "self-defense" and guns can twist into really perverse and damaging real life situations. I can't imagine this guy bought the gun illegally, so wtf are we doing giving people like this guns? Because he killed a cop you could make the argument that all of the crime that particular cop would have prevent is now also going to happen, along with impact of her own death. There are numerous negative points to make in regard to reading an article like this, such things have been listed many times in this forum. So I guess that is why I would expect by now, that it shouldn't have to be stated again. And I would 100% agree with your last statement... I think mental health is the root cause to almost all violence, and that is an ongoing longterm solution. Removing access to guns to varying degrees could be done much quicker and have a much faster immediate impact. Hence the piece about citizens having less guns in general and making the country safer (it was implied, but poorly on my part). | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
ShambhalaWar
United States930 Posts
On January 24 2019 08:59 JimmiC wrote: Bank robbery gone wrong at least 5 dead. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/police-at-least-5-people-killed-at-suntrust-bank-in-sebring-florida/ar-BBSEnvo?li=AAggNb9 Thanks for posting this, though that article and this one: https://www.cnn.com/2019/01/23/us/sebring-florida-bank-incident/index.html There is no mention of a bank robbery in either. According the article (unless I'm reading it wrong), the gunman was the one who called the police on himself and there's no mention of trying to rob the bank. It appears to me, he went in, started shooting and then called the police on himself. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
