Off-Topic Mass killings

[AUcane]

Because one man and one woman isnt the only family accepted by humans residing in America, the religious right is up in arms ready to break up more families. It is simply a talking point. Who in their right mind cares who sleeps with who?

Nah, I wasn't even referring to a *** marriage. The "family unit" point was just referring to the fact that there are many more single parent households than there were 20-30-40 years ago.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

First off I‘ve never “ attacked” anyone . Second I can’t be part of the divide because i was raised to keep religion and politics in your home. Back then it was taboo to bring that up at work or around strangers. Now people have to let everyone know their beliefs , literally the first five minutes of having a conversation and then they need to know yours. Weirdos obsess over this stuff. Its to the point theres nothing in life you can do to separate yourself from it. There’s nowhere to run.

I have zero social media and have no desire to join that toxic world. So that’s another example of me having no part in the divide. I’m not one of the people going back 10-30 years trying to find tweets, interviews , stand up routines , movies , albums , books just to destroy somebody‘s life and end there way of making ends meet. Just to show how virtuous they are. Thats just how miserable those people are. That’s an “attack”. Just like a woke poster on here calling another poster a bigot for saying “ men shouldn’t compete in womens sports”. A common sense comment that years of basic biology agrees with. That’s why its always been frowned upon for men to hit women. We have a huge physical advantage.

I compare the wokes to the crazy Christian’s back in the 80’s when I was growing up. If you didn’t agree with their ideology or ways of thinking you were ostracized, censored , ridiculed and attacked. Just to show how virtuous they were and how low and morally filthy you were. That made me very jaded towards religion. The same thing is going on now. If you don’t agree with the woke mentality you’re attacked. Just like the female skateboarder who merely said it’s not fair competing against men. Then the woke cult and trans community came out and attacked her with thousands of horrible messages. From sexist on down to antisemitic. Now imagine the media coverage if another group did such a thing to a woman. Another example is Dave Chappelle’s friend Daphne , a trans comedian who defended Dave. She was attacked online by the wokes so bad she killed herself. Once again nobody cared about that.

So once again I’ve never “ attacked “ anyone, but I’ll never back tribalism regardless if it’s from Christian’s in the 80’s or wokesters now.

Attacked, talked schit, its all the same thing. You talk politics on here , just because you "are in your home when you type it" its not the same thing.

Just because you don't have social media, doesn't make you "not part of the divide".

I agree that we shouldn't back tribalism though.

 

[imurcane]

IMO, it's more about having a caring, involved parent than the quantity and composition.

Respectfully, that is your stance. I think your stance probably represents a better home situation than many kids ever had. I do think biology and evolution can lend a hand in defining what a family is. Besides, Jesus had two dads and one mom and he turned out just fine!

Id rather have a support system that supports me as opposed to a mom and dad that suck together. I think that is your point as well. The religious right will reject your position on the family by the way. It isnt what the bible teaches. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve was unlikely stated by a liberal the first time.

 

[imurcane]

Nah, I wasn't even referring to a *** marriage. The "family unit" point was just referring to the fact that there are many more single parent households than there were 20-30-40 years ago.

For sure. I have all types of families in mind as well, just that those types of families arent what the bible purports the family to be.

 

[LeavingJesusland]

Nope. Got it from another alt media platform. I’m sure all the sources you take the time to visit have never gotten a story wrong.

Sure they’ve got stuff wrong. This wasn’t just getting something wrong, though. It was a blatant attack on the LGBTQ community by conspiracy theorists

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

Several years ago, Palm Beach County changed all of the schools to a single secured entry point that you had to be let into with locked doors everywhere else that could be used in an emergency, to get to the track, etc. It's a very simple concept that requires a little retrofitting. And yes, the high school has a resource officer parked right out front.

So I guess it’s not such a bad idea after all.

 

[pubmedu]

A: Ban guns!
B: What do I do if someone breaks into my house?
A: Call the police.
Police: Not our job.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

Nah, I wasn't even referring to a *** marriage. The "family unit" point was just referring to the fact that there are many more single parent households than there were 20-30-40 years ago.

The main determinant is poverty. Most of the kids I went to the U with either had divorced parents or had parents that worked so much they barely saw them. And all of them graduated from a great university. All of my coworkers barely spend time with their kids and all of them are going to elite colleges and are now making millions a year. Most of my neighbors spend barely any time with their kids or are divorced and none of them committed any acts of violence(in fact my town hasn't had a murder in it in the 40+ years that "divorces have been rampant". And all of their kids are getting sent off to elite high schools and colleges.

Meanwhile in the hood. The odds of a kid with 2 parents vs a kid with one ending up dead or in jail were virtually the same. and all the people I know that actually made something out of themselves had 1 parent.

 

[JD08]

Respectfully, that is your stance. I think your stance probably represents a better home situation than many kids ever had. I do think biology and evolution can lend a hand in defining what a family is. Besides, Jesus had two dads and one mom and he turned out just fine!

Id rather have a support system that supports me as opposed to a mom and dad that suck together. I think that is your point as well. The religious right will reject your position on the family by the way. It isnt what the bible teaches. Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve was unlikely stated by a liberal the first time.

Having someone at home who cares about your wellbeing and encourages you to be the best you can is what's important. I didn't say it had to be a two parent opposite *** family with a dog and cat. It just has to be someone to keep a kid focused on growth.

 

[OriginalCanesCanesCanes]

There isn’t a whole lot of reproducible science to shut the door on one view versus another. But most people involved in social services will tell you that a dual parent household - those children generally do better, especially ones where there is less rancor in the home.

They will also tell you that especially with boys, having a father can make a huge difference. That’s not to say that children from single mother households don’t succeed, because there’s obviously millions upon millions that do. But everything else being equal, I would tend to think it’s much better to come from a harmonious two parent household.

Comparison of Single-Mother and Two-Parent Families on Metabolic Control of Children With Diabetes

OBJECTIVE— To understand the impact of family structure on the metabolic control of children with diabetes, we posed two research questions: 1) what are the dif

diabetesjournals.org

Above is a study showing a direct measurable health effect, which we could (hypothesize) correlate to other social and health factors as well. Many social studies are difficult to quantify and reproduce because of self-reporting issues and lack of scientific rigor. This one has a measurable endpoint which affects the quality of life of the child.

 

[Mikeiavelli]

Well this is a great example of "never take legal advice from an LEO".

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone (Published 2005)

Supreme Court rules that police do not have constitutional duty to protect person from harm, even woman who obtained court-issued protective order against violent husband which made arrest mandatory for violation; decision overturns ruling by federal appeals court in Colorado; it had permitted...

www.nytimes.com

Of course you should not take legal advice from a LEO, that's what lawyers are for.

The point I am making, is that most statutes that local law enforcement deal with exist to protect citizens and their property. 99.9% of police officers become officers with the intention of being sheep dogs to enforce the laws that protect the public. The narrative that the police are abusive of power, or inconsiderate of citizens really irks me. Of course some cops join for the wrong reasons and bring a bad name to the profession, but they are the extreme minority.

I don't know much about the case that led up to that Supreme Court decision, but it looks like there was a horrendous breakdown by a combination of the officers, the department SOP, or even the language of the Colorado statute.

I have a problem with blanket statements made against policing as a profession.

Also, I don't know what happened with the police response to the school shooting in Texas. I would like to think that if officers were on the scene, that they would have gone in and taken care of the shooter immediately. I don't know that department's SOP, but if it is anything like most departments (including mine), you enter the building in an active shooter situation even if you are the first officer on the scene with no backup...that is your job and it should be your instinct anyways. If reporting is true regarding the police staying outside, then there is either an issue with those officers, the department SOP, or both.

 

[AUcane]

The main determinant is poverty. Most of the kids I went to the U with either had divorced parents or had parents that worked so much they barely saw them. And all of them graduated from a great university. All of my coworkers barely spend time with their kids and all of them are going to elite colleges and are now making millions a year. Most of my neighbors spend barely any time with their kids or are divorced and none of them committed any acts of violence(in fact my town hasn't had a murder in it in the 40+ years that "divorces have been rampant". And all of their kids are getting sent off to elite high schools and colleges.

Meanwhile in the hood. The odds of a kid with 2 parents vs a kid with one ending up dead or in jail were virtually the same. and all the people I know that actually made something out of themselves had 1 parent.

I agree but I'll add that single parent home + poor is a double whammy. I'd be curious to see the issues with an "intact" family household in poverty and see how they differ.

 

[We the Boss]

Just got off t-con as some old friends asked me to consult on an operational problem...ya know because I'm a nobody who doesn't know a thing...

US is about 1.3MM psychiatric beds short just to get back to 1950s-1960s levels. We are 800K Psychiatrists (MD/DO) short. Provider shortfall gets better if we expand scope of practice to lower tier providers, but very tough thing to do politically/policy/patient safety wise....

Yeah. In the 80s Reagan gutted the asylum regime. I tend to agree with that move philosophically, but it results in rampant bummery and a percentage of those folks are a real threat to themselves and others.

Anyone who’s been to skid row in LA knows that isn’t what people had in mind when they described “ordered liberty”

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

Of course you should not take legal advice from a LEO, that's what lawyers are for.

The point I am making, is that most statutes that local law enforcement deal with exist to protect citizens and their property. 99.9% of police officers become officers with the intention of being sheep dogs to enforce the laws that protect the public. The narrative that the police are abusive of power, or inconsiderate of citizens really irks me. Of course some cops join for the wrong reasons and bring a bad name to the profession, but they are the extreme minority.

I don't know much about the case that led up to that Supreme Court decision, but it looks like there was a horrendous breakdown by a combination of the officers, the department SOP, or even the language of the Colorado statute.

I have a problem with blanket statements made against policing as a profession.

Also, I don't know what happened with the police response to the school shooting in Texas. I would like to think that if officers were on the scene, that they would have gone in and taken care of the shooter immediately. I don't know that department's SOP, but if it is anything like most departments (including mine), you enter the building in an active shooter situation even if you are the first officer on the scene with no backup...that is your job and it should be your instinct anyways. If reporting is true regarding the police staying outside, then there is either an issue with those officers, the department SOP, or both.

"I have a problem with blanket statements made against police." You say this a few sentences after making a blanket statement yourself with "99.9% of police officers ......". If that was the case then those 99.9% would be arresting the .1% much more frequently as opposed to standing around and watching them break laws.

As a black man who has never committed a crime, besides maybe jay walking or something. I have had a much different experience with them.

 

[mr.h]

Texas scrambling for answers. NRA said more weapons would slow down shootings. The opposite has happened.

 

[OriginalGatorHater]

I agree but I'll add that single parent home + poor is a double whammy. I'd be curious to see the issues with an "intact" family household in poverty and see how they differ.

Well the issue is your still poor. It doesn't matter if you have June and Ward Cleaver as parents, when you don't have food on your plate every day and you have to worry about losing your home multiple times a year. You are going to resort to crime the majority of time.

 

[JD08]

Yeah. In the 80s Reagan gutted the asylum regime. I tend to agree with that move philosophically, but it results in rampant bummery and a percentage of those folks are a real threat to themselves and others.

Anyone who’s been to skid row in LA knows that isn’t what people had in mind when they described “ordered liberty”

The Community Mental Health Act of 1963 was what started the switch from institutions to outpatient treatment.

 

[AUcane]

Well the issue is your still poor. It doesn't matter if you have June and Ward Cleaver as parents, when you don't have food on your plate every day and you have to worry about losing your home multiple times a year. You are going to resort to crime the majority of time.

Not necessarily disagreeing but I would be interested to see those stats.

 

[scrantoncane]

Please, tell me this doesn't lead to Door Control Legislation.

I remodel an apartment Bldg and they want me to have like 37 exits to meet the fire code, and now we are going to 1 door at schools?!

 

[Mikeiavelli]

"I have a problem with blanket statements made against police." You say this a few sentences after making a blanket statement yourself with "99.9% of police officers ......". If that was the case then those 99.9% would be arresting the .1% much more frequently as opposed to standing around and watching them break laws.

As a black man who has never committed a crime, besides maybe jay walking or something. I have had a much different experience with them.

Cops used to stand around a lot less and do proactive community policing. Then the police became the enemy of the people, which led the reactive policing only.

I'll say one thing for sure though. I was never in a watch briefing were we all said "let's go out there and harass people and violate their civil liberties."