Who Failed

[pirana 0]

Quote

Second, it appears that you don't know the difference between culture and race ... just add it to the list of mistakes you've made and try to learn from it.

Race is one of the 3 first level factors of culture.* That is not to say race is a subset of culture, but a very strong factor in identification of it. Also, a culture can be comprised of multiple races. So it is not incorrect to say there is a difference between what the terms represent, as long as the reference does not assume they are unrelated or exclusionary.

*The 3 being race, religion, and language.

For the record, my opinion is that this person (regardless of age) should never be permitted to own a gun. Don't care what kind of bleeding heart excuses are given (bad parenting, bad genes, whatever).

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[quade 3]

Quote

Race is one of the 3 first level factors of culture.*

*The 3 being race, religion, and language.

I question that as a definition. I think it's possible to have all three be identical, yet separated by geography and end up with wildly different cultures.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[Kiyami 0]

I struggle to see a 4ft 82lbs boy couldn't have been apprehended without the pepper spray.

Do we know how many cops there were?

Are there no other options between talking and pepper spray?

[Butters 0]

Quote

Quote

Second, it appears that you don't know the difference between culture and race ... just add it to the list of mistakes you've made and try to learn from it.

Race is one of the 3 first level factors of culture.* That is not to say race is a subset of culture, but a very strong factor in identification of it. Also, a culture can be comprised of multiple races. So it is not incorrect to say there is a difference between what the terms represent, as long as the reference does not assume they are unrelated or exclusionary.

*The 3 being race, religion, and language.

The point is that if someone infers something about race from someone implying something about culture, it's revealing the relation between race and culture of the person who is inferring (not the person who is implying) ...

"That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I struggle to see a 4ft 82lbs boy couldn't have been apprehended without the pepper spray.

Do we know how many cops there were?

Are there no other options between talking and pepper spray?

They could have tazed him. Or a 200 lb police officer could have tackled him to the ground. The results of either of those options would probably have been worse. And as stated earlier, he's probably going to remember this event which isn't a bad thing.

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Race is one of the 3 first level factors of culture.*

*The 3 being race, religion, and language.

I question that as a definition. I think it's possible to have all three be identical, yet separated by geography and end up with wildly different cultures.

It's not a definition; only a list of factors cultures themselves use as first level determinants of group identity.

Two geographically separate areas can have the same race, religion, and language; and have the same or a different culture. Nothing I said precludes either outcome. However, if 2 separate groups do truly have all 3 in common, they most likely have a common ancestral source and will have many shared cultural traits.

Cultures evolve, and similar to other evolving things; the longer and more complete the separation, the less similar 2 groups of same origin will become.

Interesting you mentioned geographical separation, because that field is how I came to study the topic.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

I struggle to see a 4ft 82lbs boy couldn't have

because teachers aren't allowed to physically restrain students.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Watched closely by the rest of his life by whom?

Proper mental health professionals.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Because (in the words of the poster I replied to) he is a "red flag to a future felon", a "possible mass murderer", and "a ticking time bomb."

Is that person a mental health professional?

Quote

If all those things are true, then surely he is a poster child for someone who should not be assisted in his path to mass murder.

1. "If all those things are true" is pure guesswork.

2. Not removing someones civil rights is not 'assisting them in his path to mass murder'.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Absolutely! In fact, I'm pretty sure that's already in place for quite a number of mental health drugs and issues.

OK. So if a guy HAD issues and is now fine and not on any medications... you still think he should be denied?

Your website shows this:

"the FAA has recently advised they will now consider applicants who are utilizing one of four(4) antidepressants known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI's)."

"This should be performed for the FAA by a private physician and reviewed confidentially by an expert to establish eligibility for FAA medical certification. "

So it seems a person CAN fly with SSRI's

So, are you fine with a person who has been declared safe by the FAA now getting a medical?

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Absolutely! In fact, I'm pretty sure that's already in place for quite a number of mental health drugs and issues.

OK. So if a guy HAD issues and is now fine and not on any medications... you still think he should be denied?

Your website shows this:

"the FAA has recently advised they will now consider applicants who are utilizing one of four(4) antidepressants known as Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI's)."

"This should be performed for the FAA by a private physician and reviewed confidentially by an expert to establish eligibility for FAA medical certification. "

So it seems a person CAN fly with SSRI's

So, are you fine with a person who has been declared safe by the FAA now getting a medical?

"...will now consider..." is different than, "will allow."

In other words, there is more to it than the condition simply being able to be treated with the drugs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[DaVinci 0]

So, are you fine with a person who has been declared safe by the FAA now getting a medical?

[quade 3]

Quote

So, are you fine with a person who has been declared safe by the FAA now getting a medical?

I would be fine with a person getting a limited 3rd class medical with a stipulation it requires visits every 6 months to an FAA certified AME to ensure compliance.

2nd and 1st Class medicals I would not be comfortable with and I doubt the FAA would be either.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,402]

>Is that person a mental health professional?

I don't know. Which is why I replied to him about his statement.

>"If all those things are true" is pure guesswork.

Yes. So is "he'll be fine, don't worry about it."

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

>"If all those things are true" is pure guesswork.

Yes. So is "he'll be fine, don't worry about it."

Ah, but I never said that.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

I would be fine with a person getting a limited 3rd class medical with a stipulation it requires visits every 6 months to an FAA certified AME to ensure compliance.

OK....

Quote

2nd and 1st Class medicals I would not be comfortable with and I doubt the FAA would be either.

What if the incident was when the pilot was 8 years old and he was diagnosed with anger issues.... But from age 10-20 he had never had another outbreak?

Would you prevent that person from EVER being allowed to be a commercial pilot due to an issue 12 years ago that has been shown not to be an issue in the last 12 years?

My point is that this kid is 8.... and while he sure as hell looks like a little shit right now... that does not mean he will be a little shit all his life.

If the kid does not change his mental outlook... He will be in more trouble from now till he is an "adult". Yes, the pathological might be smart enough to play the game and then snap... But they would be smart enough to snap and do massive damage in other ways or with firearms obtained illegally.

So just like I don't look at a guys CAT A as evidence that he is not ready 1k jumps later to do a 100 way... I do look at his CAT A before CAT B.

I think you need to be as close as possible to 100% before you remove rights from a person.... and that stands for a medical to fly as well as the right to own a firearm.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

I would be fine with a person getting a limited 3rd class medical with a stipulation it requires visits every 6 months to an FAA certified AME to ensure compliance.

OK....

Quote

2nd and 1st Class medicals I would not be comfortable with and I doubt the FAA would be either.

What if the incident was when the pilot was 8 years old and he was diagnosed with anger issues.... But from age 10-20 he had never had another outbreak?
Would you prevent that person from EVER being allowed to be a commercial pilot due to an issue 12 years ago that has been shown not to be an issue in the last 12 years?
My point is that this kid is 8.... and while he sure as hell looks like a little shit right now... that does not mean he will be a little shit all his life.

Nobody said he would be. However we WERE talking about IF he needed to take medication to control his condition the rest of his life.

That and that alone is enough to say he would still have the condition and needs to be watched closely and not given access to ways to efficiently kill a great number of people.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

I would be fine with a person getting a limited 3rd class medical with a stipulation it requires visits every 6 months to an FAA certified AME to ensure compliance.

2nd and 1st Class medicals I would not be comfortable with and I doubt the FAA would be either.

bit pricey, and wouldn't be covered by insurance.

Sounds a lot like poll taxes.

[davjohns 1]

Mom says he was treated like a common criminal. That's because he is a common criminal. If he had pulled a gun, he would have been treated like a pistol range target. I don't care how old he is. When he becomes a threat to others, he gets treated appropriately. If he's old enough to make those decisions, he's old enough to suffer those consequences. Shielding kids from the natural, logical consequences of their actions only teaches them bad behavior is ok.

I know it just wouldnt be right to kill all the stupid people that we meet..

But do you think it would be appropriate to just remove all of the warning labels and let nature take its course.

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

I would be fine with a person getting a limited 3rd class medical with a stipulation it requires visits every 6 months to an FAA certified AME to ensure compliance.

2nd and 1st Class medicals I would not be comfortable with and I doubt the FAA would be either.

bit pricey, and wouldn't be covered by insurance.

Sounds a lot like poll taxes.

We're not talking about a person's right to vote based on the color of his skin and ability to pay a fee that he shouldn't be required to.

We're talking about how it might be possible to judge and continue to evaluate a person's mentally stability to be trusted with items not just dangerous to himself but others as well.

While you may desire to make these items available to a wide range of people, society in general feels mentally unstable person's shouldn't have access to them. The current discussion is about FAA medicals. My guess is what you are really talking about is guns in the hands of the mentally unstable. I'm fairly certain even the NRA is against that.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

taking SSRIs shouldn't entail a lifetime expense of semiannual full bore examinations to enjoy rights held by all other citizens. It's not at all different from poll taxes. If gun control didn't have the same history of racism, then maybe we could separate them, but that's not our history.

A person who took one of these drugs is not a "mentally unstable" person. I doubt you claim to be qualified to define that term, or if someone is or not. It would seem that after one (or two tops) of these examinations where the person gets a good signoff, you should accept that they are in fact mentally stable. Because in our country, individuals aren't denied their rights just to make the majority feel comfortable.

[quade 3]

Well, I'm glad you've come out in favor of allowing the mentally unstable have access to guns. I'm fairly certain the vast majority of the population would call that an extremist view.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Well, I'm glad you've come out in favor of allowing the mentally unstable have access to guns. I'm fairly certain the vast majority of the population would call that an extremist view.

Thanks for clarifying your position.

to further clarify, I support flag burning and letting Nazis march too.

Extreme (-ly stupid) is mandating someone get two class III health exams per year for life in order to fly or own a gun because they once took Prozac or Paxil, the drug marketed at shy people.

Aside from being medically indefensible, it's also bad policy to discourage people who may be depressed from doing something about it.

[billvon 2,402]

>Ah, but I never said that.

And I never said those things were true.

You were saying?

[Krip 2]

Hi Ron

Quote

He did not remember the previous talk downs. Do you think he will remember the pepper spray?

Quote

Anyone here ever been pepper sprayed or use pepper spray in self defense?

If the kid didn't remember it the first time, or the second time any further use imo is a waste of time and even cruel.

Search Youtube for pepper spray and watch the show. It works on most people. One big bad dude was shot by multiple cops in a bar in New orleans with pepper spray. It got his attention but didn't stop him. Maybe on PCP or something.

We have a friend who is a sheriff deputy that ended up wrestling with a drunk. The sheriff injured his ankle that required surgery. I was to find out he had to file a workmens comp claim, like every other joe blow and wait in line for the insurance company to do the right thing.

One Jump Wonder