skypuppy

billvon

>quote - Hiroshima had a high concentration of troops, military facilities and
>military factories that had not yet been subject to significant damage

So killing 90,000-150,000 people in cold blood was justified because of a military value on the target; the people were just unfortunately in the way.

Then I stand by my original statement. If there had been a military value in this shooting (say, reducing the amount of enemy propaganda) this action would have gotten this guy a medal had it been in a war - and no one would be claiming he was crazy.

Again from Wikipedia, about 1/3rd of the dead were Imperial Army soldiers. Along with the military infrastructure, then yes.

As far as your other statement, now you're changing the scenario. If there was military value - and he'd been ordered to do it - then maybe he'd be a hero. But deciding to do it because he didn't like them -- no, you're wrong.

You just seem to like to argue...

billvon

>bullshit. targeting civilians is a war crime,

So you believe Tibbetts is a war criminal?

>and as for paul tibbetts, my understanding is there were 66,000 killed by the bomb

The estimates range from 90,000 to 150,000.

quote - Hiroshima had a high concentration of troops, military facilities and military factories that had not yet been subject to significant damage
end quote.

The civilians in Hiroshima were not targeted. Military targets were. Civilians died, yes, a lot of them, but the bombing was for against military facilities....

Therefore, no, Paul Tibbetts is not a war criminal...

Again, according to Wikipedia, 66 thousand, with maybe 6ooo more from radiation...

Even at your 150 thousand estimate, that is not hundreds of thousands. It would be one hundred thousand and a bit...

billvon

>what this guy did was cold blooded murder of fellow countrymen in peacetime

Yep. And had we been at war, and they had been the enemy (even if they had also been his fellows) he would have gotten a medal for exactly the same action.

We consider Paul Tibbets mentally healthy. He killed hundreds of thousands in cold blood.

Calling specific killings "a sign of mental illness" to argue for getting guns away from them is a cop out. Some mentally ill people are killers - but killing alone does not make one mentally ill. Many perfectly sane, functioning people are killers, and whether they are heroes or criminals depends entirely upon who they kill.

bullshit. targeting civilians is a war crime, doesn't matter if you're at war. He would not have gotten a medal for those murders...

and as for paul tibbetts, my understanding is there were 66,000 killed by the bomb, with possibly another 6,000 dying of radiation after (they may have been included in the initial 66k for all I know)... he didn't kill hundreds of thousands...

For a scientist, you're not very exact...

Coreeece

***Twas a perfect world of Canadians visiting American dropzones.... If Canada was too cold for jumping, we could visit our Southern American neighbours; Not that it stops anyone from jumping anywhere in America nor anytime of the year but with the increasing USD and decreasing CAD, its becoming more likely...Canadians can just stay and pay Canadian jump ticket prices. Whereas, We used to jump the border and get nearly two jump tickets in America for the price of a Canadian jump ticket. The American dollar is strong and its a good thing but more often, Were seeing Canadians post "gear for Sale" in USD? why? Because, its obvious. You can make more money on your gear but what happens during the time of inversion? Is every American going to list their gear in CAD? Where is the meek chance of Asset security and our fair market pricing based on the market? Example: Person A in USA is selling a canopy at the fair market price of $1600USD (DOM:08/2013 w/200 Jumps) but Person B in Canada is selling a similar canopy for $1600USD (Dom: 08/2011 w/400 jumps)? Person B should have their Canopy listed in CAD...it would be fair market value, right? but person B also knows there is a better profit margin if the canopy is sold in USD. Is this a ethical situation or highway robbery? I can see they are Playing the stock market game and its good to go but When the playing field is on par, who is filling the hurt feelings report? Now, you cant buy Canadian gear without a USD price tag and it hurts the propulsion of Canadian skydivers. There should be a reasonable "fair market" trading price whether or not the currency is playing the same game. On the other side, its not painfully pricey for Americans to visit Canadian dropzones or buy Canadian gear listed in CAD. thats a win! Maybe I should be the one filling a hurt feelings report because I cant afford to buy American gear due to exchange rates... its a healthy rant. $1 USD equals $1.33 CAD which has been a low for the summer but when your a happy hopping Canadian who exchanges $1000CAD for altitude in America, you get $753.30USD for jump tickets. A Canadian jumping in Canada: $1000CAD equals 28 jumps($35CAD/jump). When a Canadian jumps in America: $753.30USD equals 29 jumps($26USD/jump)...If your a Canadian, Where would jump thus being based on travel and accomedations? If a American jumps in Canada: $1000USD equals $1,327.37CAD which turns into 38 Jumps($35CAD/jump) but If that same American jumps in America: $1000USD equals 38 jumps ($26USD/jump)...mind blown. Were on Par for jump prices despite travel expenses which can vary based on many of expenses and luxurys...packers anyone?! neuf said. Going back to the gear... We all need to remeber the fair market value! Does your new car lose 30% when it rolls off the lot? Yes. And you lose $1 for everytime you jump the canopy? Yes. But no matter what the market does, we still need play a safe and happy game of currency exchange rates and fair market value. Now, I cant buy a new PD Storm for $2,080.00USD (w/o Tax, shipping, currency, customs and love) becuase its going to cost me $2,758.65CAD and my relationship with a happy wife ,which equals Happy life buts thats a different rant...

Right now I'm just too impatient to read your anti-paragraph...

But living in Detroit, we'd go to Canada and party since the legal age was 19...$100 USD would get us like $160 CAD...good times.

It's amazing...we'd come back to the US drag racing across the ambassador bridge lit off our asses and they just let us through...

Now you need a fucking passport just to take a shit in the duty free/exchange shops...

I lived near sarnia. We used to go to the Red Fox in Port Huron when I was 18. Then, just after I turned 19, which was legal age in Ontario, they changed the age in Michigan to 21. We were there that night. They let us in, but at midnight they went around checking everyone's id and kicked out anyone under 21...

There was also a bluegrass bar across the street that was fun...

actually, at that time the cdn dollar may have been worth more than the us dollar... Geez I must be old...

Driver1

I suspect these guys were in the right place at the right time to take the gunman down before he caused any further injuries...

Oooo FUCKING Rah!

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/cebit/three-wounded-in-shooting-on-amsterdam-to-paris-train/ar-BBlYrvf

something strange going on here. One report I read said the marines spotted the guy in Brussels and followed him onto the train. What did they spot? Why'd they follow him? Then it said they heard the sound of him cocking the rifle when he was inside the washroom. They were sitting close enuf to hear that in a moving train?

This guy was known to police, he'd been under suspicion before. Sounds to me like they were following all along....

PhreeZone

That flag is not automatically set and is only activated when you check the box on a post for NSFW. Typically the kids will not bother going back and editing the post to turn that on inunless it's pretty clear that it needed a turned on. On mobile postings the check box is near the choose file button so sometimes it gets turned on by accident. Was the post showing as edited by a mod?

I didn't see anything showing edited. I seem to recall I had trouble posting that first message, I suppose it may be possible that I checked it by accident: it would be the first and only time it's happened to me, but it may be the only reasonable assumption...

normiss

Spam button?
Not me, don't know where that button is.
Nothing labeled as such.

You think I'd play that shit?

I didn't actually which is why I was surprised. I don't really understand what had happened, just that my post wasn't there - instead a flag 18+ - nudity or adult content and a link to turn off the control on my profile so I view the post - which once I did that, was only the innocuous post I had put up.

I did try pushing the spam button on another post to see if it broke it down to adult content or advertisement or something else, because it didn't just show spam, it showed an 18+ in a red triangle. But clicking on the spam button here doesn't break it down like it does on, say, facebook, into different categories...

As I said, I deleted that post, and then reposted.

I have reported in the feedback forums to see if they can find what happened, if it matters. Like I said, I'd never encountered it before...

one of my posts, which I deem innocuous, seemed to be flagged as '18+' nudity or adult content involved, and I had to go into my profile, turn off the control in order to see that the post really was the innocuous post I had written (basically post 1342 of the riot over shooting thread).

I ended up deleting that post, and re-posting, but I'm wondering how it happened? If someone hits a spam button does that cause it? I tried hitting a spam button to see if it broke it down into, say, nudity, advert, etc. and it didn't give me an option to say what it was, but maybe the program does it itself?

Anyway, if it was someone hitting a spam button, I didn't think it was really cricket...

sorry, I was testing this to see if it gave different categories of spam, and now I can't undo it...

Incidentally,someone seemed to hit the spam button on my post saying there's nudity or adult content on it when there was nothing wrong with the post. that doesn't seem to be playing fair. I really wasn't sure what had happened with the post so I deleted it and reposted. Maybe I should have left it for the mods to look at?


It was certainly strange, I'd never seen that tactic used before...

normiss

"Given the cops ARE one of the rival groups, surprised?"

I see no implication, cops ARE rival groups in all of the recent events.
Claiming otherwise is dishonest.
Reading comprehension matters...sometimes certain words are the differentiators.

in the context that the cops are a rival group to groups of thugs and looters that are going around initiating firefights between themselves, I can agree with that. However I do not agree that this group of cops was in any way responsible for the fact that this young guy got shot after firing at police.

And again in the context of the discussion at that point, I saw an implication of the cops causing the incident ie being one of the original two groups shooting. If that was not so, fine, but everything the cops did in that situation, from the facts I've heard so far, makes sense.

normiss

So you don't think the cops shooting at the group that started shooting at them, that resulted in the shooting of the armed man, were considered rival groups?
I beg to differ. It's quite likely THE reason the dumbass started shooting at them in the first place.

the cops didn't shoot until they were fired upon. That was the whole point of the discussion. The cops didn't even show up until the two groups had already starting shooting at each other. Showing up (and stopping it) during such an event is what the cops are supposed to do. And that appears to be what they did.

Your original post way back when seemed to imply that cops just happened by and picked a fight with a group, not the reality that an altercation occurred between two groups and the cops responded. The cops were not at fault for that.

normiss

I never claimed they were.

from post 1182, Anvil (in reply to Amazon) - 'yea the cops totally made the two rival groups shoot at each other Sunday night'

in reply, post 1183, Normiss - 'Given the cops ARE one of the rival groups, surprised?'

ryoder

*** Just called the congressman's office and spoke to a very nice woman who answered the phone. I informed her of my displeasure in his alignment with this group and my commitment to donate considerable sums of money to any opponent who challenges him in the next election.

I cited interference with general aviation and interstate commerce among other things.

Here's his number.

Jared Polis
(202) 225-2161

I've sent Polis email before, and am on his mailing list, and subscribed to his Twitter feed.
I just sent him an email with a synopsis of Batshit Lady, and links to the court orders.

did you ever get any replies?

jakee

Quote

The sentiment here is to downplay the actions of the criminals and make the crimes they commit seem like nothing.

No, the sentiment here is to make a petty thief sound like Al Capone. In fact you've been so keen to try and inflate his previous burglary convictions that I think even you can't really stomach the thought of someone spending their entire life in prison for such petty indiscretions.

Quote

This is a modern times judicial reviewed constitutional legally medthod

Right, reviewed by one court who said it was a prime example of an unjust sentence, and by a supreme court who said it was constitutionally excessive and grossly out of proportion but just not quite blatantly unconstitutional enough to overturn.

Maybe you were never told that just because you can do something it doesn't mean you should.

Quote

I have no sympathy for the criminals.

I have no sympathy for people facing proportionate sentences after being tried for doing things that should be illegal.

I do have sympathy for people caught in a web of arbitrary sentencing for offences which shouldn't exist and are applied in a shockingly racist fashion.

So you're fine with putting al capone in prison for a long time? All he did was cheat on his taxes! ALL OF US would like to cheat on our taxes if we could.

billvon

>At one point we simply followed someone outside the store after being notified
>by security of a shoplifter, and he turned on us and pulled a knife. And I believe
>the guy I was with had his shirt slashed, and the company refused to give him
>another shirt, because they said he shouldn't have tried to detain him.

I like it! Nothing like having your employees wear cut up clothes to inspire customer confidence in your store.

Customer: "Hey why is your shirt cut up like that?"
Clerk: "Guy tried to knife me last night in the parking lot. They won't give me a new shirt."
Customer "Oh . . . OK then . . . maybe I'll head to that other market . . . . fewer knifings I hear."

I said they refused to give him one, not that they let him wear the cut up one. He had to buy one. But they gave him the 10% employee discount. I seem to recall it was about 10:30 in the morning.

It was Kmart. We were both 'management trainees'...

billvon

>And what are they to do if someone tries to steal a gun?

Physically get in their way. Grab the gun they are trying to take. Call the cops. Hit the alarm button (if they have one.) All the things that clerks have done for centuries now to keep people from stealing things.

Clearly clerks are good deterrents; part of the plot to steal the guns was to lure the clerk away from the counter so they wouldn't have to deal with him. Thus a strategy that is as simple as "don't leave the counter" would help.

But if you think that would not be effective (or that Wal-Mart could not competently enact such a plan) then by all means, lock them up.

actually, when I worked in retail, company policy (and it was a big company) was that you DID NOT in any way get into a physical confrontation with a shoplifter. At one point we simply followed someone outside the store after being notified by security of a shoplifter, and he turned on us and pulled a knife. And I believe the guy I was with had his shirt slashed, and the company refused to give him another shirt, because they said he shouldn't have tried to detain him. In other cases we were told people had lost their jobs from attempting to physically detain someone caught shoplifting...

normiss

"Police said a Harris opened fire on the officers, who were in an unmarked car, and the officers gave chase on foot. Harris was shot after he allegedly fired a stolen 9mm handgun at the officers, who returned fire, police said."

Police and protesters on August 10, 2015
Later on in the night, two groups of suspected looters began firing at each other during a demonstration. Four plain-clothed officers in an unmarked sports utility vehicle responded to the scene. There, they shot a man who allegedly opened fire on them with a stolen 9mm SIG Sauer handgun. The suspect, identified as Tyrone Harris Jr., was hospitalized in "critical and unstable" condition. Three hours after the shooting, two teenagers were wounded in an apparent drive-by shooting as they were walking near a memorial dedicated to Brown. A journalist was also attacked and robbed[144][145][143][146]

There. Now you know that the police were not one the original two groups......

rehmwa

************

Quote

Considering one of my cats was killed by a bear a couple of years ago, this is actually a serious problem

Unless the bear came in your house and ate the cat, the issue is with you letting the cat outside.

I don't see the issue. One less cat, problem solved.
How does one reward the bear for his service?

Feed it another one?

and you think this is funny, do you?

I chuckled -however, sorry you lost your pet, sucks, you'll have to get another

I'm a farm boy - we always had half a dozen at any time. except in the spring, one or two would always get frozen over winter - but the replacements were quick to arrive.

now if it was a dog!! then that bear would be in big trouble

I have looked into a lot of bear incidents dating back to at least the 1970's in Ontario. and earlier.

Dogs are often cited as a major part of the reasons for bear attacks in that either they piss the bear off and make it defensive before leading it back to its owner, or in that the owner intercedes and attempts to get the bear away from the dog...

The incident I mentioned from a couple of years ago where the bear entered a man's house and chased him out the front door before mauling him, the bear had followed his dog when it ran into the house, possibly through a small pet door, I don't remember exactly.

Of course that is just on attacks that happened, and won't take into account how many bears smelled a dog and cleared out instead of being taken by surprise by a mere human coming up the trail. So much like defensive uses of guns where guns are never fired, the numbers would be hard to quantify.

I do know that we never had the bears actually coming right up to our house back when we had the dog, and it was actually not until he passed away from old age that they became a problem. However, that was also around the time they cancelled the spring bear hunt, which is generally held to be the main reason for recent (as in the last 10-12 years) bear overpopulation and for bears moving into more urban settings in the province.

billvon

"Please let me know right away if you mailed a check and did not receive a thank you note from me. The Longmont rural postal delivery has been unreliable for nearly a month and I have reported concerns to the post office."

Uh oh. Could the post office be next? "I can't enjoy my home with the post office losing thousands of my letters every day! And yet the mail trucks that thunder by my home every day leave me nearly deaf. Please join me in a new lawsuit to protect responsible homeowners who just want to receive their important mail in peace."

maybe someone from mile-hi could pick up her mail at the post office and skydive down into her back yard with it...

funny

SkyDekker

Quote

again, no explanation as to why you make a totally FALSE statement, in such a tone as to imply you know for a fact it's illegal to let a cat roam and infer there's no argument

It is in this part of Canada. If it isn't in BC fine...your local SPCA strongly recommends you keep your cat indoors though, partly for this specific reason. Outdoor cats don't live as long as indoor cats. You made the decision to allow your cat to go outside, stop whining about the consequenes. Take some responsibility for your own actions. You sound like a Trudeau.

***Especially in the tone of your statement that you find it FUNNY that an animal was killed?

Find it funny that some one who normally stands for personal responsibility and living with the consequences of one's actions, refuses to take responsibility for his own actions.

You cat gets mauled by a bear and it is everybody else's fault....except the fault of the person who let the cat out in the first place.....

That stuff is funny...yes.

wrong. I live in Ontario. It is not illegal in Ontario. It may be illegal in Ottawa, or Oshawa or barrie or London. It isn't where I live. If you're going to try to make a positive statement about something being illegal, especially something as SICK as finding humor in something's death, you should maybe take responsibility for what YOU say.

There are lots of ways to use the English language to qualify what you say, but in most conversations you get into you seem to like to come across as the one with all the answers. If you want to come across as the 'all-knowing reasonable' conscience of humanity, you should dam sure make sure that what you're saying is either CORRECT or qualify it by saying 'where I live' or 'in some places', instead of trying to LIE.

Frankly, I never said I don't take responsibility for the cat being killed. But the bear is also to blame, and next time he comes looking for a meal he's going to find something else. That in no way makes it less of a problem that bears have over-run southern Ontario and pose a danger to pets children, and others, to the point of having bear safety classes in school, and citizens having to resort to chasing bears off with bats and sticks.

You lack all credibility when you try to defend your LIE. A simple statement that you were wrong would have sufficed, or even a qualification. But no, you have to go on to say it's funny. And your expression of humor is frankly,sick.

Bolas

***Another valid question is why shoplifting is a felony. The guy took a $159 jacket. Why should that be considered a felony?

If he, in his own words, "Just needed a jacket." why steal an expensive one? Surely they had a sale rack.

Or go to a thrift shop and (gasp) buy one for pocket change.

In the other case in that article, it seems Washington had carefully thought out his theft, planning on stealing two shirts from the sale rack with a combined value less than the minimum for a felony. But he screwed up and took two shirts with a higher price. His miscalculation put him over the limit.

To my mind, the fact he planned his theft out so carefully (even though he screwed it up) means he is a habitual thief anyways...

It wouldn't bother me if the legislatures revisited some of these laws and reduced the sentences a bit -- however, I have no problem with the practice of a 3 or 4 strike law imposing long sentences for habitual criminals.

As for Don's statement about stealing a slice of pizza, that's a tough one. I might be willing to go lightly or dismiss cases which involved stealing in order to live. That would depend on individual circumstances. If they're stealing in order to have food because they spent their money on drugs or something else, though, then probably not.

jakee

So, in a fair, free country how many convictions for shoplifting jackets should lead to death in prison?

(Because you know, the rest of the developed world manages to run along just fine on a fraction of your incarceration rate. The only reason for you to lock up so many people is because you like doing it.)

You'd probably have to define for me, the phrase 'run along just fine'... I'm sure there are victims in the rest of the developed world who actually don't believe that their little corner of the universe is
'running along just fine'...

jakee

Quote

He didn't just go to long-term prison for stealing a 159 dollar jacket. YOUR STATEMENT, LIKE MANY IS MISLEADING IN THAT YOU DO IMPLY HE WENT TO JAIL FOR JUST ONE OFFENCE.

I'm not implying that. Going to jail for life for stealing four jackets is just as great an injustice as going to jail for life for stealing one.

I was replying to Skydekker