Statistics for 1/21/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 42
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
IIRC, from the "Brideshead Revisited" TV series, Sebastian (after a messed up, wastrel, degraded sort of life*) wound up in the care of a Catholic charity, and died at peace.
*From the POV of the series. Don't remember details. But wasn't there something about his being gay/bi? And maybe acting inappropriately?
... And are you EVER going to fucking apologize to Ross? Like any decent human being would?
I did apologise, I apologised for not being considerate, but people are asking me to apologise for something that I do not think is wrong. Namely for stating that we are responsible for the consequences of the laws we support. It mightn't be nice, but it is still true.
lilbuddha contra mundum*. Everybody else can see what she cannot, or vice versa.
______________
*against the world. Famously said of Athanasius.
Rook agreed with my point. Because he saw through the personal to the logic of the argument.
I'm pretty sure he likes me no more than you do, but he did not let that interfere with his mental processes.
But if, as you suggest, we restrict ourselves to accidental deaths, it's not a special case. The negligence associated with leaving a loaded gun accessible to a toddler is the same as the negligence associated with leaving an unfenced swimming pool, bandsaw, or other potentially lethal device accessible to that same toddler, or leaving that toddler in a car on a hot day, or even not screwing your toddler's chest of drawers to the wall.
Again, I disagree. The purpose of a gun makes for no safe situation without making the thing impracticable for its intended purpose. The same is not true of a car or a pool.
... And are you EVER going to fucking apologize to Ross? Like any decent human being would?
I did apologise, I apologised for not being considerate, but people are asking me to apologise for something that I do not think is wrong. Namely for stating that we are responsible for the consequences of the laws we support. It mightn't be nice, but it is still true.
If the post below is the, er, "apology" you reference above, I'm afraid we're still in epic fail territory. It's possible that your occasional lapses in--as mousethief puts it, "saying what you mean"-- is responsible.
(bolding mine)
As for an apology; I do not apologise for positing the question, for the reasons I just wrote. However, if someone else had posted what she did, I would likely have tried to write it more gently than I did. So I do apologise for not being more gentle and considerate.
What the bolded sentence, as written, actually says is this:
"If someone else had posted what she ["she" presumably = Ross] did, I would likely have tried to write it ["it" presumably = the post which got you into difficulties] more gently than I did."
In other words, because it was Ross (and not someone else) who posted what she did, then you felt no need to tread gently. On the contrary, apparently only posters other than Ross merit your consideration. That's your apology?
We can all hope that's not what you meant, but it is what you wrote. Because your primary concern here seems to be issuing unassailable judgments rather than being present, honest, and compassionate, I find it hard to cut you slack (you don't cut much for others). Here's what would help me over this challenge: Try acknowledging when you get things wrong. Try apologizing for causing hurt or offense. Try using sufficient care in wording your posts so that they represent what you actually mean.
Lilbuddha doesn't have the guts to apologize; that would mean admitting that she was wrong, and she doesn't have the courage or moral standing to admit that she's ever, ever wrong. She hates me, unreasonably, apparently because I do sometimes point out where she's wrong. And this concerns one of her most hateful posts ever: She apparently really believes that it would have been better had I been raped, possibly beaten, possibly murdered, rather than scare off the rapist who was terrorizing my apartment building by cocking a (legal) revolver.
She is monstrously wrong on this one. But she can't or won't do the one thing that would be basic to any decent human being, which is to admit it and apologize. She's nothing but a troll, and a singularly dishonest and deceitful troll at that. She tells us nothing about herself, but misuses the information we post - as members of a community - to attack us. And she clearly has no conscience or sense of shame. That's obvious from too many of her posts. I pray for her, because I believe in praying for my enemies - but it's a real challenge to pray for someone so consumed by loathing for others.
lilbuddha contra mundum*. Everybody else can see what she cannot, or vice versa.
______________
*against the world. Famously said of Athanasius.
Rook agreed with my point. Because he saw through the personal to the logic of the argument.
I'm pretty sure he likes me no more than you do, but he did not let that interfere with his mental processes.
For the last time, I did not make accidents the cornerstone of my argument.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did. My first contribution was to quote the part where you doubled down on it. REITERATING it.
I quoted the moment where you decided to state you were summarising your argument. If this summary was lacking the essence of your argument, well, more demerit points for you.
Alternatively, we are proving that alternate universes exist and can be in contact with one other, which will interest some theoretical physicists a great deal.
... And are you EVER going to fucking apologize to Ross? Like any decent human being would?
I did apologise, I apologised for not being considerate, but people are asking me to apologise for something that I do not think is wrong. Namely for stating that we are responsible for the consequences of the laws we support. It mightn't be nice, but it is still true.
The stated consequences being... deaths of children from accidents.
In this universe anyway. Contents of other universes may vary.
For the last time, I did not make accidents the cornerstone of my argument.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did. My first contribution was to quote the part where you doubled down on it. REITERATING it.
Accidents or not is a red herring. The statement "A consequence of legal gun ownership is innocent deaths" is a general one for which, as you say, the word "gun" could easily be substituted by "cars". Most of those innocent deaths might be in vehicle accidents, some purposeful (a car can be just as deadly a weapon as a gun).
The irony is, I don't think anyone doesn't get this. I think it's the simple point that @lilbuddha was trying to make in the first place; that society has to weigh these things up. It's just that she made it in a hugely emotive, insensitive and personal way.
The corresponding question for vehicle owners would have been "Is your commute worth all the dead children dead from car crashes? Because that is the question."
IIRC, from the "Brideshead Revisited" TV series, Sebastian (after a messed up, wastrel, degraded sort of life*) wound up in the care of a Catholic charity, and died at peace.
*From the POV of the series. Don't remember details. But wasn't there something about his being gay/bi? And maybe acting inappropriately?
Gayness is heavily implied but not explicitly stated in the book. Sebastian ends up somewhere in the colonies where he sets about drinking himself to death with gusto. According to Cordelia he ends up in the care of a Catholic charity and makes a beautiful end but it's not entirely clear how much of that is wishful thinking rather than actual truth.
For the last time, I did not make accidents the cornerstone of my argument.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did. My first contribution was to quote the part where you doubled down on it. REITERATING it.
Accidents or not is a red herring. The statement "A consequence of legal gun ownership is innocent deaths" is a general one for which, as you say, the word "gun" could easily be substituted by "cars". Most of those innocent deaths might be in vehicle accidents, some purposeful (a car can be just as deadly a weapon as a gun).
The irony is, I don't think anyone doesn't get this. I think it's the simple point that @lilbuddha was trying to make in the first place; that society has to weigh these things up. It's just that she made it in a hugely emotive, insensitive and personal way.
The corresponding question for vehicle owners would have been "Is your commute worth all the dead children dead from car crashes? Because that is the question."
I may be wrong, but I don't think the basic problem here is with lb's making her "simple point." As you note, nobody's arguing against that point: we all understand that more guns = more injuries and accidents involving guns.
The ensuing kerfuffle blew up after one shipmate (Ross) introduced a personal anecdote about cocking a pistol in response to a threat. In response, lb -- who shares very little personal info about herself aboard Ship -- attacked this action as rendering Ross personally responsible for the deaths of innocent children.
Thereafter, two main "outrage" responses emerged.
One targeted the central fallacy in lB's argument that the action described in Ross's anecdote somehow brought about deaths (the pistol wasn't fired). lB's refusal to acknowledge the illogic in the personalized example, plus the suggestion that Ross (and by extension all of us) should be willing to suffer rape, injury, and death rather than avail ourselves of whatever defensive measures are available to us.
The other targeted lB's use of personal, albeit freely shared, information to attack Ross when lB keeps her own personal details under fairly tight wraps. Aside from the fact that such behavior may constitute an ad hominem attack elsewhere on the Ship and therefore violates Commandment 3, this exchange took place in Hell, where it's allowed, yet still seems fundamentally unfair. You hand me a factoid I can (and do) use against you, but I keep my own factoids out of reach = an unequal competition. I don't see any immediate remedy for this, but it's worth considering what Gandhi, nonviolence's originator, has to say: "I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor."
An indepth discussion of the complexities and paradoxes within nonviolence must wait for another thread, but it's worth noting that the situation described by Ross plainly doesn't meet Gandhi's criteria for a meaningful nonviolent response. Ross's sacrifice, had she made it, could not have had the effect intended by nonviolent sacrifice; it was too limited and too private. Far better to cock the pistol and live to protest another day.
Bottom line: it is perhaps unwise to trust lB with information about oneself, one's actions, opinions, or speculations; she may use them against one. This makes discussion on the Ship a potentially risky business. Coupled with her obdurate refusal either to explain her points of view or reasons for holding them, or to accommodate viewpoints other than her own, pose an ongoing problem.
The abstract became ever less so as there was a mass shooting yesterday (1 dead, 7 wounded, suspect at large) in downtown Seattle, about a mile from where @Josephine works. Her commute home from work takes her within a few blocks of the scene, but thankfully for her (and those of us who love her) she was well past by the time the shooting occurred. It's all numbers until someone you know is at danger.
Now we've both had a near-brush with gun violence, so to speak. Life is precious. Tell your people you love them every chance you get.
I used to moan about being limited to how many aspirin I could buy at one time. Then I discovered that suicide by aspirin had plummeted since the ban came in, simply because they weren't so easily available. I stopped moaning. (About that, anyway.)
Statistics for 1/22/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Seattle WA; 1 dead, 7 injured
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 59
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
lilbuddha contra mundum*. Everybody else can see what she cannot, or vice versa.
______________
*against the world. Famously said of Athanasius.
Rook agreed with my point. Because he saw through the personal to the logic of the argument.
I'm pretty sure he likes me no more than you do, but he did not let that interfere with his mental processes.
I like you just fine, and respect much of the unique contributions you can share. So please hear me in the "I'm not fucking with you" and "I'm not trying to score points" manner in which I intend this.
Yes: you have a point that I agree with. I agreed so much that I made it even before you did: that it is unwise to contemplate general policy in the context of anecdotal emotional examples.
But what you seem to fail to grasp, or acknowledge, is that this point doesn't un-create the emotional sense that people have about their anecdotes. Feelings aren't wrong, they are just information. That a person can feel relief or gratitude for a gun is absolutely true - and trying to argue against that truth is an act of emotional violence.
Your premises often appear to assert that feelings can be wrong. You may have noticed that these don't have much utility. A person feeling revulsion at a spider isn't having a wrong feeling; it's information that they suffer arachnophobia. With some insight, they can change their thinking to perhaps affect that feeling. But by castigating them for accurately reporting their emotional reaction, you just make them defend their fear as true. And all you accomplish is being an asshole.
Regardless of where you feel you were in your snippy-exchange with Rossweisse, your apology-like post was shitty and lame. You know it. We know you know it. If you don't admit it, people will think you are shitty and lame.
So, to what degree are you an asshole who is shitty and lame?
Statistics for 1/23/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 19
Total injuries: 38
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/24/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 28
Total injuries: 63
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
And this concerns one of her most hateful posts ever: She apparently really believes that it would have been better had I been raped, possibly beaten, possibly murdered, rather than scare off the rapist who was terrorizing my apartment building by cocking a (legal) revolver.
This is also untrue. I am glad you were not harmed.
That doesn't change that guns kept for personal protection will kill far more innocent people than they save.
For the last time, I did not make accidents the cornerstone of my argument.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did. My first contribution was to quote the part where you doubled down on it. REITERATING it.
Accidents or not is a red herring. The statement "A consequence of legal gun ownership is innocent deaths" is a general one for which, as you say, the word "gun" could easily be substituted by "cars". Most of those innocent deaths might be in vehicle accidents, some purposeful (a car can be just as deadly a weapon as a gun).
The irony is, I don't think anyone doesn't get this. I think it's the simple point that @lilbuddha was trying to make in the first place; that society has to weigh these things up. It's just that she made it in a hugely emotive, insensitive and personal way.
I'm not going to argue the insensitive at the moment.
But as far as the personal, that was part of the point.
The basic point is one that has been made on the gun threads multiple times and hasn't been very controversial. But the personal caveats, like the self-defence argument, that we often feel are part of the overall problem with solving/mitigating issues.
The corresponding question for vehicle owners would have been "Is your commute worth all the dead children dead from car crashes? Because that is the question."
Not that guns are completely simple, but cars are a more difficult issue. A whole lot needs to be changed and massive investments are needed just to make life the same level of inconvenient it is now and be rid of cars. Not working towards those changes is accepting the deaths.
But they are still different. Cars are a solution to a problem caused by other factors.
Guns are a solution to a problem caused mainly by guns.
For the last time, I did not make accidents the cornerstone of my argument.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did.
You either read the whole interaction for context or your response means fuck all. Especially when you make a claim regarding "entirety".
What counts as "the whole interaction", then? Page 1?
I went back pages and pages. I'm sorry if I missed something that you mentioned pre-Rossweisse / during the Great Interregnum / when Trump was a boy, rather than the thing that you apparently thought was important to enough to head with "let me reiterate" the second or third time I read it.
EDIT: Actually no I'm not sorry. You're being an intransigent jerk.
Being a super asshole then singing "And I Won't Back Down" is not a good look. LB, you have been transitioning into a raging asshole for at least 6 months. You didn't used to be like this.
Statistics for 1/25/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 64
Children under 12 killed: One: 3-y.o.boy dead in Baton Rouge of gunshot would believed to be accidental
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
]I do not hate you. And you began treating my posts with animosity and disdain long ago.
No, actually - it was mostly just snark. I do sometimes call you on your inaccurate and unsupported posts, but I have never gone after you as you went after me here.
This is also untrue. I am glad you were not harmed.
That doesn't change that guns kept for personal protection will kill far more innocent people than they save.
You never suggested that you were glad I was not harmed before this post. And most guns kept for personal protection never kill anyone. But thank you for finally saying that you don't think it would have been better had I been a victim rather than scaring away the rapist. It's a relief.
Statistics for 1/26/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Four: North and South Carolina, New York, and Missouri: 5 dead, 16 injured
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 64
Children under 12 killed: Two: 2-y.o.boy dead in California; 3 y.o dead in New York
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/27/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 injured in Connecticut
Total deaths: 27
Total injuries: 58
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/26/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Four: North and South Carolina, New York, and Missouri: 5 dead, 16 injured
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 64
Children under 12 killed: Two: 2-y.o.boy dead in California; 3 y.o dead in New York
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Am I reading this correctly? There were 4 mass shootings in ONE DAY? Two children were killed - terrible.
And none for a couple of days before. It ONLY averages one a day...the four is a bit jarring though, yes?
I am peripherally affected by this. Guns are not ubiquitous in Canada, but many of those that do float around, usually the illegal ones, originate in the U.S.
Statistics for 1/28/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 18
Total injuries: 35
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/29/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 9
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/30/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One, in California: 4 injured
Total deaths: 26
Total injuries: 66
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 1/31/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Two: Florida, 1 dead; 3 injured; Louisiana, 4 injured.
Total deaths: 22
Total injuries: 49
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
CORRECTION to stats for 1/30/20:
Two children killed. 1 4-y.o. boy in Philadelphia; 1 2-y.o. in Alabama
Statistics for 2/1/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 32
Total injuries: 51
Children under 12 killed: Two: 1 3-y.o. in Virginia from random gunfire; 1 5-y.o., no gender given, in Tennessee, self-inflicted.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
CORRECTION to stats for 1/31/20:
Mass shootings: 1 dead, 4 injured in California; 1 dead, 3 injured in Florida; 0 dead, 4 injured in Louisiana
Statistics for 2/2/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 20
Total injuries: 54
Children under 12 killed: One Alabama child under 12 killed; no gender or precise age given.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Cry, the beloved country. Tears of blood and anguish. Cry for the lost innocents. Cry for their lost potential. Am I feeling, or am I numb? The wetness under my glasses says I feel, but soon I will forget. At least I felt for a time.
Statistics for 2/3/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Two: 1 dead and 5 injured in California; 3 dead and 1 injured in Maine.
Total deaths: 32
Total injuries: 61
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Statistics for 2/4/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 19
Total injuries: 38
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
A sad new experience for us a few days ago. Before entering a hospital in New York State we had to go through a newly installed metal detector to be checked for guns and other weapons. We asked if they often find them, and were told that they do. The owner is asked to leave the building and come back later without it. It seems that guns are the modern remedy for dissatisfaction with your health care provider.
Might also be that some carry as a matter of self-protection and habit, and just don't disarm when they go into a hospital--maybe don't even think of it.
Not that there aren't people who use guns to express dissatisfaction with health care providers, employers, etc. Just that, if *all* gun carriers were inclined to use their guns that way, there'd be many, many more incidents.
Not defending going around carrying a gun. But I doubt that all the gun carriers stopped at that hospital were there to use them.
Is there anything that people with with guns need to actually defend against that isn't part of some fantasy action thriller?
Man: Hey God, I just want you to know I am committed to protecting my family at all costs.
God: Gosh, that’s great to hear. One of the main things I need you to do to protect your family is laundry. Tons of laundry. You know kids...— they’re so susceptible to infections and viruses. Pinworms, athlete’s foot, lice, strep throat, colds and flues. Pneumonia and diarrhea are *serious killers* of children under five. The list is endless. So you’re going to need to do laundry pretty much daily. Launder their socks & underwear, their sheets. Put their sneakers through the wash. I can’t emphasize this enough: protecting your family involves a lot of laundry.
Man: Oh. Um.
I was thinking more along the lines of a masked intruder with a gun at 2 AM raping my family.
God: First of all, stop fantasizing about your family being raped....
Might also be that some carry as a matter of self-protection and habit, and just don't disarm when they go into a hospital--maybe don't even think of it.
....
Not defending going around carrying a gun. But I doubt that all the gun carriers stopped at that hospital were there to use them.
Possibly awareness of gun violence being a serious public health issue has informed the policy of hospitals. Plus awareness that if one of these "good guys" finds himself in the position to use his gun his doing so is far more likely to create work for the hospital than help in any realistic manner. I don't suppose that US hospitals are any different from UK ones, and don't have the spare capacity to treat a lot of gunshot wounds, especially if some of those injured are their own doctors, nurses and other staff or patients who already need a lot of care. Even if the shooter has the best intentions but gets it wrong.
Statistics for 2/5/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 people killed in Indianapolis; no injuries.
Total deaths: 21
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Comments
Statistics for 1/21/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 42
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
*From the POV of the series. Don't remember details. But wasn't there something about his being gay/bi? And maybe acting inappropriately?
I'm pretty sure he likes me no more than you do, but he did not let that interfere with his mental processes.
No. You didn't. As explained here:
She is monstrously wrong on this one. But she can't or won't do the one thing that would be basic to any decent human being, which is to admit it and apologize. She's nothing but a troll, and a singularly dishonest and deceitful troll at that. She tells us nothing about herself, but misuses the information we post - as members of a community - to attack us. And she clearly has no conscience or sense of shame. That's obvious from too many of her posts. I pray for her, because I believe in praying for my enemies - but it's a real challenge to pray for someone so consumed by loathing for others.
Oh please. Check your ego.
At the point where I started reading and everyone got helluva upset with you, you did. My first contribution was to quote the part where you doubled down on it. REITERATING it.
I quoted the moment where you decided to state you were summarising your argument. If this summary was lacking the essence of your argument, well, more demerit points for you.
Alternatively, we are proving that alternate universes exist and can be in contact with one other, which will interest some theoretical physicists a great deal.
The stated consequences being... deaths of children from accidents.
In this universe anyway. Contents of other universes may vary.
Accidents or not is a red herring. The statement "A consequence of legal gun ownership is innocent deaths" is a general one for which, as you say, the word "gun" could easily be substituted by "cars". Most of those innocent deaths might be in vehicle accidents, some purposeful (a car can be just as deadly a weapon as a gun).
The irony is, I don't think anyone doesn't get this. I think it's the simple point that @lilbuddha was trying to make in the first place; that society has to weigh these things up. It's just that she made it in a hugely emotive, insensitive and personal way.
The corresponding question for vehicle owners would have been "Is your commute worth all the dead children dead from car crashes? Because that is the question."
Gayness is heavily implied but not explicitly stated in the book. Sebastian ends up somewhere in the colonies where he sets about drinking himself to death with gusto. According to Cordelia he ends up in the care of a Catholic charity and makes a beautiful end but it's not entirely clear how much of that is wishful thinking rather than actual truth.
I may be wrong, but I don't think the basic problem here is with lb's making her "simple point." As you note, nobody's arguing against that point: we all understand that more guns = more injuries and accidents involving guns.
The ensuing kerfuffle blew up after one shipmate (Ross) introduced a personal anecdote about cocking a pistol in response to a threat. In response, lb -- who shares very little personal info about herself aboard Ship -- attacked this action as rendering Ross personally responsible for the deaths of innocent children.
Thereafter, two main "outrage" responses emerged.
One targeted the central fallacy in lB's argument that the action described in Ross's anecdote somehow brought about deaths (the pistol wasn't fired). lB's refusal to acknowledge the illogic in the personalized example, plus the suggestion that Ross (and by extension all of us) should be willing to suffer rape, injury, and death rather than avail ourselves of whatever defensive measures are available to us.
The other targeted lB's use of personal, albeit freely shared, information to attack Ross when lB keeps her own personal details under fairly tight wraps. Aside from the fact that such behavior may constitute an ad hominem attack elsewhere on the Ship and therefore violates Commandment 3, this exchange took place in Hell, where it's allowed, yet still seems fundamentally unfair. You hand me a factoid I can (and do) use against you, but I keep my own factoids out of reach = an unequal competition. I don't see any immediate remedy for this, but it's worth considering what Gandhi, nonviolence's originator, has to say: "I have been repeating over and over again that he who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honour by non-violently facing death may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor."
An indepth discussion of the complexities and paradoxes within nonviolence must wait for another thread, but it's worth noting that the situation described by Ross plainly doesn't meet Gandhi's criteria for a meaningful nonviolent response. Ross's sacrifice, had she made it, could not have had the effect intended by nonviolent sacrifice; it was too limited and too private. Far better to cock the pistol and live to protest another day.
Bottom line: it is perhaps unwise to trust lB with information about oneself, one's actions, opinions, or speculations; she may use them against one. This makes discussion on the Ship a potentially risky business. Coupled with her obdurate refusal either to explain her points of view or reasons for holding them, or to accommodate viewpoints other than her own, pose an ongoing problem.
Now we've both had a near-brush with gun violence, so to speak. Life is precious. Tell your people you love them every chance you get.
nudge theory example 3
Statistics for 1/22/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One in Seattle WA; 1 dead, 7 injured
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 59
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Glad you're both ok!!!
I like you just fine, and respect much of the unique contributions you can share. So please hear me in the "I'm not fucking with you" and "I'm not trying to score points" manner in which I intend this.
Yes: you have a point that I agree with. I agreed so much that I made it even before you did: that it is unwise to contemplate general policy in the context of anecdotal emotional examples.
But what you seem to fail to grasp, or acknowledge, is that this point doesn't un-create the emotional sense that people have about their anecdotes. Feelings aren't wrong, they are just information. That a person can feel relief or gratitude for a gun is absolutely true - and trying to argue against that truth is an act of emotional violence.
Your premises often appear to assert that feelings can be wrong. You may have noticed that these don't have much utility. A person feeling revulsion at a spider isn't having a wrong feeling; it's information that they suffer arachnophobia. With some insight, they can change their thinking to perhaps affect that feeling. But by castigating them for accurately reporting their emotional reaction, you just make them defend their fear as true. And all you accomplish is being an asshole.
Regardless of where you feel you were in your snippy-exchange with Rossweisse, your apology-like post was shitty and lame. You know it. We know you know it. If you don't admit it, people will think you are shitty and lame.
So, to what degree are you an asshole who is shitty and lame?
Statistics for 1/23/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 19
Total injuries: 38
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 1/24/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 28
Total injuries: 63
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
That doesn't change that guns kept for personal protection will kill far more innocent people than they save.
But as far as the personal, that was part of the point.
The basic point is one that has been made on the gun threads multiple times and hasn't been very controversial. But the personal caveats, like the self-defence argument, that we often feel are part of the overall problem with solving/mitigating issues. Not that guns are completely simple, but cars are a more difficult issue. A whole lot needs to be changed and massive investments are needed just to make life the same level of inconvenient it is now and be rid of cars. Not working towards those changes is accepting the deaths.
But they are still different. Cars are a solution to a problem caused by other factors.
Guns are a solution to a problem caused mainly by guns.
What counts as "the whole interaction", then? Page 1?
I went back pages and pages. I'm sorry if I missed something that you mentioned pre-Rossweisse / during the Great Interregnum / when Trump was a boy, rather than the thing that you apparently thought was important to enough to head with "let me reiterate" the second or third time I read it.
EDIT: Actually no I'm not sorry. You're being an intransigent jerk.
Statistics for 1/25/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 64
Children under 12 killed: One: 3-y.o.boy dead in Baton Rouge of gunshot would believed to be accidental
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
You never suggested that you were glad I was not harmed before this post. And most guns kept for personal protection never kill anyone. But thank you for finally saying that you don't think it would have been better had I been a victim rather than scaring away the rapist. It's a relief.
Statistics for 1/26/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Four: North and South Carolina, New York, and Missouri: 5 dead, 16 injured
Total deaths: 29
Total injuries: 64
Children under 12 killed: Two: 2-y.o.boy dead in California; 3 y.o dead in New York
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 1/27/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 injured in Connecticut
Total deaths: 27
Total injuries: 58
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Am I reading this correctly? There were 4 mass shootings in ONE DAY? Two children were killed - terrible.
I am peripherally affected by this. Guns are not ubiquitous in Canada, but many of those that do float around, usually the illegal ones, originate in the U.S.
Statistics for 1/28/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 18
Total injuries: 35
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 1/29/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 9
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 1/30/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One, in California: 4 injured
Total deaths: 26
Total injuries: 66
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 1/31/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Two: Florida, 1 dead; 3 injured; Louisiana, 4 injured.
Total deaths: 22
Total injuries: 49
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
CORRECTION to stats for 1/30/20:
Two children killed. 1 4-y.o. boy in Philadelphia; 1 2-y.o. in Alabama
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/1/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 32
Total injuries: 51
Children under 12 killed: Two: 1 3-y.o. in Virginia from random gunfire; 1 5-y.o., no gender given, in Tennessee, self-inflicted.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
CORRECTION to stats for 1/31/20:
Mass shootings: 1 dead, 4 injured in California; 1 dead, 3 injured in Florida; 0 dead, 4 injured in Louisiana
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/2/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 20
Total injuries: 54
Children under 12 killed: One Alabama child under 12 killed; no gender or precise age given.
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/3/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): Two: 1 dead and 5 injured in California; 3 dead and 1 injured in Maine.
Total deaths: 32
Total injuries: 61
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Statistics for 2/4/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): 0
Total deaths: 19
Total injuries: 38
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.
Not that there aren't people who use guns to express dissatisfaction with health care providers, employers, etc. Just that, if *all* gun carriers were inclined to use their guns that way, there'd be many, many more incidents.
Not defending going around carrying a gun. But I doubt that all the gun carriers stopped at that hospital were there to use them.
FWIW, YMMV.
Link to thread.
Is there anything that people with with guns need to actually defend against that isn't part of some fantasy action thriller?
Statistics for 2/5/2020
Total mass shootings (4 or more casualties): One: 4 people killed in Indianapolis; no injuries.
Total deaths: 21
Total injuries: 41
Children under 12 killed: 0
Info courtesy of Gun Violence Archive.org.
Any errors mine.
Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us.