Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - D.W.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36
General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: October 13, 2018, 09:53:31 PM »
160 events
5 by armed individuals, 3% and change by non LEO
21 by unarmed individuals, 13% and change by non LEO

Estimates on percentage of civilian population that go armed looks like 5% at the low end, 10% at the high end but the number is hard to pin down.

Now I suck at statistics but if even 1 in 10 are armed at the high end then it looks to me that having a firearm is more than twice as effective as not.  More than 4 and a half times if the actual number is at the lower end of armed citizen estimates.

So it seems to me, "even by the untrained" is the crux of the issue.  Does that mean non-LEO / non-military?  Or does it mean someone who never took a class but shoots at the range often?  Or does it mean someone who owns a gun and rarely if ever fires it? 

You are correct, I was neither kind nor respectful.  And maybe my math and way of looking at that info is terribly flawed and shows my bias.  But from where I'm standing, you are ignoring an obvious data point that substantiates the statement made and are trying to tackle it as a semantics debate.

General Comments / Re: "The Fed Has Gone Crazy!"
« on: October 11, 2018, 12:44:24 PM »
Savings and Checking accounts capable of offsetting ATM withdrawal fees with interest earned would be a novel experience...

General Comments / Re: Invest in automation
« on: October 10, 2018, 08:23:52 PM »
Funny, the smartphone is my biggest detriment towards productivity.  However, despite this, other improvements have kept productivity going up in my line of work.  ;)

And 1% sounds unacceptable until you do the same napkin math on the lifetime risk of actually being raped... 

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: October 09, 2018, 02:50:55 PM »
So please point out where in your source it supports the claim that even untrained armed response is effective.  3% isn't effective, it is noise. And you have absolutely no idea of how much training the 3% unarmed civilians had, so even that is not proven.
I didn't go back through this thread to dig into this 3% number again, but (from what I recall) it is appears numerically lower than the actual impact when you consider the percentage/odds of an armed civilian being present. 

And while I understand you are fixated on "proof" it seems almost to the point of willful ignorance to discount armed confrontation leading to active shooter suicide.  (Be it by police response or civilian)

A post truth society!  The new dark age has so many brightly lit screens.    8)

The News.  Because without a high standard in reporting we'd never know to what extent others lack standards...

General Comments / Re: Misleading or False Claims by Trump
« on: October 08, 2018, 01:10:23 PM »
Is that an actual economics term?   ;D

General Comments / Re: Invest in automation
« on: October 06, 2018, 02:26:49 PM »
If we get to the point where we can create self aware AI capable of reproducing/improving themselves, I think beyond some variation on Asimov's the Laws of Robotics, we need to blast them out into space.  Their use here should be limited because us humans are an untrusting / untrustworthy lot.  If we can brand ourselves as creators giving our "children" an opportunity to explore with the hopes that they will keep us apprised of what they've found out there it could work out.

Designing our own self aware slaves (robots) is likely to end poorly.  For us.  :P

Then again, I'm also for some singularity/transhumanist evolution that doesn't leave us behind.  ;)

General Comments / Re: Misleading or False Claims by Trump
« on: October 05, 2018, 12:50:55 PM »
That is a question that on it's face seems to insist on transparency.  I tend to agree with that sentiment.  However rightleft22's point about such nakedness being viral is a problem.  When blatant disregard for the niceties becomes contagious it makes me question that sentiment. 

General Comments / Re: Invest in automation
« on: October 05, 2018, 11:46:42 AM »
Unless we botch it and create a SkyNet or Omnius, robot labor should be a good time for all of us.  Once we wrap our head around that kind of world.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 07:27:14 PM »
Thank God they avoided asking him about his favorite beer then.   ::)

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 06:58:48 PM »
Given that assessment of the current climate, and the proficiency with witch he dodged questions, one would think it a trivial task to avoid making such mistakes...  Not like he risked looking even more like he had something to hide.   ::)

Particularly for one aware of conspiracy of evil forces plotting against him.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 05:33:39 PM »
Some of them were obviously false.  I'll leave it to the lawyery folk which of those reach the level of perjury. 

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 04:43:45 PM »
As far as those articles go, trying to list "lies" they do more harm than good in making their case.  "Instances where his statements or answers strained credibility."  Sure.  It's (a little) subjective, but there is a huge line between "Lie" and "Almost Certainly BS".  At least half of them were on the wrong side of that line.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 04:09:46 PM »
At least the WP link backed up the definition I knew for the Devil's Triangle.   ;D

Then again I'd only very rarely heard the term "boffing" used.  I thought that was just slang for sex/screwing/f'ing used primarily in the UK.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 11:20:08 AM »
That the Democrats would risk coordinating an entirely fabricated "hit" in the form of a (knowingly) false claim is dangerous.  To knowingly put forward a guilty party to bait the Democrats and have it come out would be catastrophic. 

I'm sure there are some shady people on both sides willing to exploit the issue of sexual harassment and assault for political gains but I don't see power brokers making this type of risk-reward assessments. 

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 04, 2018, 09:30:59 AM »
I like the "3 evil spirits" as in drinks theory.  Obviously the people I hung out with were less clever, less paranormally inclined,  and more amused by the puritanical/homophobic taboo...   ;D

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 03, 2018, 09:44:47 PM »
While it's possible that the Devil's Triangle was a drinking game they made up.  If so I have little doubt that the inspiration for the name was the commonly used definition.  Maybe I just hung out with more pervs, but I knew what that one was well before google and urban dictionary was a thing... 

Had he said, "It's not what you are thinking, we named a drinking game that."  Or some variation of this excuse, I'd have been willing to roll my eyes and think, "OK, I suppose that's plausible."  To suggest it wasn't at least a nod towards the MMF threesome in the form of something unrelated stretches credulity. 

Though maybe I'm wrong and they told stories and took a shot for every friend, relative or second cousin who lost a yacht or private plane in the Bermuda Triangle...  Or maybe one of them tried to draw a pentagram and was stopped mid way when someone more sober pointed out that would be a star of David.  From then on it was a running joke about The Devil's Triangle, that the others would never let go...  Anything's possible... I guess...


General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 03, 2018, 03:26:50 PM »
While far from a clinical definition the way my friends and I ever used it refereed to the lose of memory NOT the unconsciousness. 

If your friends relay to you what YOU did at that party and you go, "I don't remember any of that..."  Then you got blackout drunk.

If you fell asleep early on due to too much drinking we would say, "you passed out early", and likely would have derided you with various dispersion regarding your low alcohol tolerance.

I never got "blackout drunk" by that definition, but I on more than one occasion found myself a comfy chair and "passed out" early on while the party continued.  :P 

Other friends who urinated or vomited in places not designed to receive either... or did amazingly silly/dangerous/stupid things without remembering them?  They got "blackout drunk".

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: October 01, 2018, 04:12:41 PM »
Or, my friends and I got blackout drunk occasionally at that age.  :P

General Comments / Re: Elon Musk's Problems
« on: September 28, 2018, 01:49:09 PM »
In that he may "pull a Trump" it would be that, "it's just a tweet everyone!"

With his use of 420 in it as an apparent weed joke/reference, I think the penalty is out of line.  I'm not sure if I like it or not, but the growing consensus seems to be Twitter is never to be taken seriously or a foundation for which to make important decisions...

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 27, 2018, 09:56:31 AM »
I don't know about where you work, but where I do, no matter how impressive my job history and qualifications were, if there were allegations floating around that I could be a sexual harassment suit waiting to happen, they would find a reason to keep looking.  If there was a chance that this info would come out and I would be a liability when sent to discuss projects with female clients or prospective clients; they'd find a reason to keep looking.

And that doesn't even touch on the fact that a president, senator, congressman or judge could be legislating or ruling on matters of women's rights.  A task one would hope be done by people who don't give others reason to believe they don't respect women.

Of course all of that doesn't excuse the fact that some Democrats were going to stall, rave and vote no, no matter who was put forward.  I'd call it childish but after seeing what happened to our last president I can't say I'm shocked by the reversal.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 26, 2018, 09:18:55 PM »
I'm with you on almost all of that Fenring.  The only distinction I make is that these are, or tend to be, people being considered for considerable power over others.  This is a job interview, or in other cases an election.  The context is different than a court of law, even if the stakes are no less serious.

Asking the government body or the people of the country, "are you SURE you want this person in power?" is just not the same thing as the world of evidence, proof and jurors.

We should be skeptical, but in this case, we are being asked to place a bet.  I would put my money elsewhere. 

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 26, 2018, 08:57:52 PM »
What I find strange about this line of thinking is: why I would think anyone should believe me today, if I felt I could not prove his guilt 35 years ago?  If I don't think anyone is going to believe me, or should believe me, why would I come forward?  The same thinking that kept someone from speaking out when the crime occurred is still valid
I think that misses the point.  I said "had no faith I could prove his guilt", that is different than "nobody believing you". 

This is NOT a legal case.  This is someone (or multiple people now) coming forward and suggesting, Kavanaugh is not worthy of the respect implied of this post.  That he is NOT the type of person that should be confirmed.  This is a plea for morality, not "justice" under our legal system which they know would fail them at this point.

Should our world be one where victims can come forward immediately without shame and be celebrated for doing their part to safeguard the rest of us from predators?  Sure, but it certainly wasn't the case then, and still isn't yet today. 

Maybe soon we'll dispense with with privacy all together and record every moment of our lives and there will be no shadows for the monsters to hide in.  "Proof" will be easy to come by and victims, not so much...  But that's not the reality we live in.

The idea that you would let it go until they are nominated as a Supreme Court Justice is weird to me.  Did it not mean anything when he was nominated as a Federal Circuit Court Judge?   I dunno.
Two parts to this.  Lets say this was traumatic but you are never faced with this name in your day to day life let alone see them in person.  Then suddenly there they are, in the news, on your TV.  Not only that, but they are about to achieve some serious prestige and the power to exert long lasting control over not just you but all women in this country for the rest of their life. I think it's perfectly plausible to believe someone would ask, "if not now, when?" and be moved to act, knowing they will fault themselves forever if they continued to keep quiet.

It may be convenient to believe that when such accusations and dirty laundry is aired just when a judge is about to achieve a S.C. nomination or a presidential candidate is closing in on a nomination or electoral win, that it's "just politics", but I tend to see it differently.  Could it be I'm playing into some operator dastardly plan?  Sure.  Stranger and more deplorable things happen when it comes to politics but my reflex is to believe plausible and significant accusations, even when leveled at politicians or candidates I like.

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 26, 2018, 05:34:43 PM »
While this COULD be total fabrication by those willing to lie for their political motives I find it interesting how casually dismissed the possibility of one line of thinking:

I had no faith that I could "prove" his guilt at the time, and having done so, that any significant punishment would have occurred.  I opted to move past this this and try to get on with my life.  While it always stuck with me, railing against him would serve no purpose.  Eventually I did indeed move on and gave my attacker/harasser/abuser as little thought as possible.  Now however, this person is being considered for a position of power.  One which the facade of morality and good judgement is a part if not a requirement.  The idea of this monster, as I still view him as such, being in a position of (this much) power over others sickens me.  I am willing to face the obvious slings and excuses of those who will doubtlessly defend them in an attempt to prevent that.

I'm sure few if any articulate the thought process in such a way, but it seems perfectly plausible to me.  That this possibility seems to occur to so few always perplexes me.  "Why not come forward sooner?"  "Why not press charges?"  "The timing means it's OBVIOUSLY a lie..." and so on.  I tend to lean towards what I see as the far more logical and likely result.

Sure they may (all) be liars.  But it's equally as plausible to me, and probably more so, that they are not, are remembering clearly and are attempting to do a public service to at least warn people that the face being presented is not representative of the person behind it.

General Comments / Re: Hey Doc--I figured out a treatment for schizophrenia
« on: September 26, 2018, 05:24:46 PM »
A better review than I've given on my last few contacts with medical professionals.  :)

General Comments / Re: Corey Booker and Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 24, 2018, 04:11:47 PM »
Here we are.  Predator until accusation withdrawal, yet innocent until proven guilty.

Even if you could get charges filed, the odds of a conviction are slight. 

I can't say I've followed the NYT comments section much, but if you are correct, it's an aberration as far as comment sections go.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 20, 2018, 09:42:01 AM »
But that scenario is extremely unlikely so I generally think I'm safer when everyone isn't walking around with a tool solely designed for killing people.
That isn't a bad argument other than this part of it.  The statement could still stand as a generalization of all gun violence and be a valid opinion; (one I come done weighted a bit more heavily towards rights of self defense), but it's not the only reason people would want to go armed.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 20, 2018, 08:47:01 AM »
The Gifford’s shooter is one of the strongest cases for restriction on semi-automatic rifles with large magazines. He was stopped by unarmed bystanders during a reload. The death toll in that shooting is undoubtedly lower because the shooter used a semi-automatic pistol with a standard magazine size instead of an ar-15 with a 50 round magazine.
If this was meant as a response to me, then you've changed gears on topic.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 19, 2018, 10:42:15 PM »
So, as I suspected, there is no statistical (and exceedingly hard to find even anecdotal) support for the argument that armed bystanders make the situation worse.

Your cautionary tale is some one who COULD have made a tragic mistake?

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 18, 2018, 01:30:51 PM »
Is your problem with his claim that it is the "most effective"?  Reading that as relying upon the small percentage of armed civilians are intended to exceed the effect of police ?  (who will eventually arrive)

Or is it that 14 of 17 still managed to get the job done of subduing an aggressor without a fire arm and that somehow is viewed as "more effective"?

When you account for how infrequently an armed citizen is present to oppose an aggressor in these situations, the data seems to do nothing to disprove Seriati's assertion. 

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 18, 2018, 01:25:46 PM »
Seriati said that the source proved armed civilians to be the most effective thing.  The source does not show that.  Period.  You can make gross assumptions that are completely unrelated and uncorroborated by the source, that might possibly sort of justify that claim if you squint real hard.  But the claim was definitive, and the source does not support it.

I am not saying the claim is wrong.  I am saying the source clearly, unambiguously, fails to support the claim, even though Seriati said that it did.

How do people with integrity respond to that situation?
I didn't read the source.  What was quoted here were numbers.  Those numbers appear to make Seriati's case in even the least favorable interpretation.  I put forward that there may be an even more favorable interpretation.

Is your reply made from a position of integrity?

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 09:56:57 PM »
It was an interesting source to cite. 
3 were caught by the victims through use of a gun.
Did any of the 5 who fled or the 44 who killed themselves do so because they ran into armed resistance?

Even if the answer to that is 0, how common is gun carrying in that area?  Totally unscientific google bashing has a headline of "3 million Americans carry a loaded weapon every day".   Less than 1%

Goes a bit higher if I check my state for % of population with concealed carry permits.  (7%) but not all of them will carry every day.

So even if it stays at JUST 3.  That seems to work out about right.  In fact, better than I'd expect. 

That interpretation has nothing to do with if such a small number, of an already rare occurrence, should dictate policy, but I suppose THAT is how one could respond.  And keep their integrity intact.  :P

General Comments / Re: I’m sorry but I don’t get it
« on: September 17, 2018, 03:24:56 PM »
Trump's biggest fault on this front is being so arrogant he can't back off a point when he's wrong.  Something anyone that posts on a message board is also guilty of from time to time.
Ahh true equality reigns in this glorious nation!  Where the President of the United States is held to the same standard as but the lowliest of internet poster. 

Makes me wish we had an American flag emoji.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 03:16:48 PM »
That's a tricky one to get to the bottom of.  Most gun-free zones are, by design, places congested with people.  The question of site statistics are kinda blown because you have an armed society, with islands of gun-free zones in these congested areas, vs an unarmed society who still has these congested areas.

The only way one COULD study for a difference is if the gun-free zones did not exist.

If one was only concerned with solving "mass shooter" or "spree shooter" problems, then the solution is simple.  Gun-free zones are an impediment.

If one is trying to balance lives saved by a gun-free policy vs lives lost because of one, that's something else entirely. 

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 03:08:38 PM »
Taken to the maximum, let's say everyone is armed. Does this feel safer? Every fistfight escalates into a duel. Every joker who doesn't know proper gun safety is susceptible to an negligent discharge
This argument never ceases to shock me.  That fistfights are socially acceptable and not dangerous in and of themself.  If EVERYONE is armed?  Posturing and threat displays are a thing of the past.  Everyone KNOWS how dangerous others are.  You don't "win an argument" through intimidation when all involved are equally dangerous.  You don't "teach someone a lesson" when it could cost you your life.  You don't escalate a situation unless you are sure it's worth killing or dying over.

Would it be more prone to accidents?  Would unstable people also now be that much more dangerous?  Yes to both.  But if you want a world where you can safely beat the *censored* out of me because you don't like the way I looked at you or something I said?  Screw that. 

Some people are civilized.  Others need threat to keep them in line.  Would you steal from me if the police weren't likely to catch and imprison you?  Would you drive safely if you weren't likely to be ticketed or lose your license?  Being afraid of getting shot should not be what stops someone from restraining their desire for fisticuffs.  Go find a boxing gym tough guy.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 01:59:28 PM »
That is a good starting point for an argument that no matter how effective an armed bystander is during a mass shooting event, the trade off in lives potentially saved is not worth those lost due to other firearm related incidents which may be prevented with a "gun free zone" campus.

It however has zero to do with this statement in your OP:
But none is more confusing than gun free zones. To hear pro-gun people tell it, declaring a gun free zone will immediately attract mass shooters. Get rid of the gun free zones, they posit, and this will somehow either be a deterrent to mass killers or allow them to be stopped by someone else armed.

You are ALMOST making some good points.  Your framing just sucks.  The posit is sound.  The costs as you point out are real.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 01:36:56 PM »
If Dunn was unarmed, he might have avoided a confrontation with a bunch of guys playing loud music. Or if he did, he's probably just going to storm off angry and fume about it.
Conversely, if someone intent on instigating a situation where they shoot at a bunch of guys, if one or more of those guys were armed then THAT would be relevant to what we were discussing. 

  • Gun Free Zones
  • Self Defense Laws
  • Crime involving Guns

If you think of this discussion as a Venn diagram your point is not overlapping as much as you think it is.

I don't think you'll find many gun rights supporters who will argue, "I should have the right to be armed in public so that *I* can stop a mass shooter."  I don't believe I've ever heard one argue that they believe they would never need a firearm for self defense but JUST in case there's a spree shooter, they'd like to have one to address the threat before the police arrive.   ::)

The debate on defensive gun use vs. assault with a firearm by (previously?) "lawful gun owners" is always an interesting (and murky) one.  Not one that should be ignored, but also not one that should pull the e-brake on any other related discussion.  IMO at least.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 11:15:30 AM »
OK... I can see how you can shoehorn Zimmerman into the "civilians made the situation worse" category.  The other, not at all.

Neither are even remotely close to what was being addressed.  But, taken out of context, I concede that not ALL gun use is defensive.  (Was that necessary to even say?)

General Comments / Re: Trump Properties and Shell Companies
« on: September 17, 2018, 09:42:38 AM »
Unless it was a foreign government that would benefit in that sloppiness.  It's not like Putin is a Democrat or a Republican after all.

General Comments / Re: gun free zones, cause and effect
« on: September 17, 2018, 09:21:23 AM »
Do you think it would possibly escape our notice if armed civilians "trying to help", made the situation worse was a thing?  This would be paraded around and cited constantly as an argument against private gun ownership.

General Comments / Re: Conservative Property Destruction makes me laugh
« on: September 14, 2018, 10:16:15 AM »
While generally true, does that also apply to Nike?  It seems to me their market slants heavily towards the male end of the scale.

General Comments / Re: Hey Doc--I figured out a treatment for schizophrenia
« on: September 13, 2018, 08:28:54 PM »
I have the sneaking suspicion that the long hours which are part of health care schooling have a side effect of distorting the perception of time for those in the field. 

Oh sure I know they lack the number of professionals needed for the number of patients in most cases, but that bit of data is rendered inaccessible the moment I sit down in a waiting room or am required to pretend I am an equal participant in the scheduling process where they dictate which day I may thank them for disrupting.   :-\

General Comments / Re: Hey Doc--I figured out a treatment for schizophrenia
« on: September 13, 2018, 08:04:47 PM »
(i.e. someone who has NEVER been able to simply apologize for mistakes like a sane person suddenly can do so without any problem)
Is THAT the bar we're using for sanity now?  Well crap, bad news for large part of the Ornery sample group.   ;D

In that case, "should" would be welcome.  It's the "will" that you should be concerned with.   8)

General Comments / Re: Hey Doc--I figured out a treatment for schizophrenia
« on: September 13, 2018, 02:53:47 PM »
I think this thread is better than a word of the day calendar.  That's what I think.   ;D

That schizophasia or paronomastic were indicators rather than intentional literary devices is interesting, unless you are selling yourself short here.  At the risk of inflicting harm rather than offering aid, I would caution against alarming yourself when you detect either. 

That last bit though is important.  Soliciting advice or aid from lay people, particularly in the anonymous land of the interweb, is never without risk. 

As much as I like Obama I can't disagree with a lot of the criticism here.  He successfully branded himself as someone trying to actually accomplish (good) things while Congress refused to "do their jobs".  Trump has branded himself as a petulant child who wants what he wants and he wants it now. 

I told one of my friends who I discuss politics with a lot at one point that POTUS should primarily be the Cheerleader-in-chief and his "job" was to reassure the public things are running smoothly and they could trust in the government.  To project confidence and calm reassurance.  (he was rather dismayed by this suggestion)

In short, POTUS needs to BE the "adult in the room", not the one being minded by other adults in the room.  Because Obama was good at this, and Trump has *censored* the bed in this regard, the lenses we use to view the two of them are distorted.

I really wish I could look only at the actions taken and policies moved forward (or pushed backwards) by Trump and ignore HOW he operates.  It would be interesting if the optics really didn't matter.  Unfortunately, from where I'm sitting, he's failing at the most important part of his job.  To make the country, and the world, believe things are running smoothly, and in fact cannot do anything BUT run smoothly, because this is America.

Was Obama an autocrat?  I think he just wanted to do what he felt was best for the country, and over reached now and then, and the system pushed back where appropriate.  Trump I see as wanting to be king, and have as much power as possible and surround himself with people who can help him achieve it.  Not much push back going on.  "Perceived" motives matter.  Those on the other side of the red/blue divide probably would swap those names and descriptions I guess...

I'm not always sure I'm a good person.   I tend to keep things more simple and just determine if I'd like to spend more or less time around a person. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 36