Only in America

Guns don't kill threads; Ratz kill threads!
Post Reply
User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73015
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by JimC » Sun Mar 26, 2017 10:02 pm

Toddlers FTW! :woot:

Suck it up, Daesh! :{D
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
rainbow
Posts: 13528
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2012 8:10 am
About me: Egal wie dicht du bist, Goethe war Dichter
Location: Africa
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by rainbow » Mon Mar 27, 2017 5:47 am

Tero wrote:Toddlers vs terrorists
Noting that “in most cases, the toddlers are killing or injuring themselves,” Ingraham counted 58 total toddler-involved shootings in 2015 as of 17 December of that year. In 19 instances toddlers shot and killed themselves, and in two others toddlers shot and killed other individuals. That brought the total of toddler-involved shooting deaths in the United States in 2015 to 21.

By contrast, if we counted both the Chattanooga shootings and San Bernardino as instances of Islamic terrorism, that would mean 19 Americans were killed in instances of suspected, reported, or potential Islamic terrorism in 2015. Counting American victims of the November 2015 Paris attacks brought that number up to 20.
http://www.snopes.com/toddlers-killed-a ... errorists/
Suicide toddlers.
:smug:
...the worst kind.
I call bullshit - Alfred E Einstein
BArF−4

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 20981
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by laklak » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:05 pm

Toddlers are terrorists. Mine certainly were.
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by Forty Two » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:20 pm

Tero wrote:Toddlers vs terrorists
Noting that “in most cases, the toddlers are killing or injuring themselves,” Ingraham counted 58 total toddler-involved shootings in 2015 as of 17 December of that year. In 19 instances toddlers shot and killed themselves, and in two others toddlers shot and killed other individuals. That brought the total of toddler-involved shooting deaths in the United States in 2015 to 21.

By contrast, if we counted both the Chattanooga shootings and San Bernardino as instances of Islamic terrorism, that would mean 19 Americans were killed in instances of suspected, reported, or potential Islamic terrorism in 2015. Counting American victims of the November 2015 Paris attacks brought that number up to 20.
http://www.snopes.com/toddlers-killed-a ... errorists/
As a result, western countries, particularly the US, should focus their energies on accidental injuries and deaths, rather than devote energy on preventing terrorist organizations from developing and obtaining the means of carrying out large-scale terrorist attacks. It's not just toddlers.... The fact that it's more likely I'll die slipping and falling in the shower than being bombed by a terrorist means that the Obama Administration waste hundreds of billions of dollars in military and foreign affairs dollars addressing nonexistent issues. https://www.theatlantic.com/national/ar ... hs/244457/

The terrorists are just a small time issue in the world....

Oh, and this is perfect for the "Only in America" thread, because let's face it, this happens only in America. Every other western industrialized country has their priorities much straighter.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by pErvinalia » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:25 pm

I think the point is to put the relative danger in perspective. Attempt to get those who are driven by fear to try and get some perspective.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by Forty Two » Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:35 pm

pErvin wrote:I think the point is to put the relative danger in perspective. Attempt to get those who are driven by fear to try and get some perspective.
Body counts are not the only way to assess relative danger. The potential damage is a factor when analyzing risk. A .001 percent chance of another 9/11 style attack is worth more investment than a 1% chance of a slip and fall, because of a view of the consequences. Let's call the damage from a slip and fall death at, say $1,000,000 for a round number, and let's call the expected damage from a 9/11 style attack as like $15 billion just for infrastructure, with 3,000 lives, and let's call them each a $1,000,000 too, so that's like $18 billion dollars right there. So, even if we limit the damages caused by a 9/11 attack to a million per person and the property damage directly caused (not factoring in long term losses, the effect on the economy overall, etc.), its far more important to stop the highly speculative, but highly damaging 9/11 type attack.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
Hermit
Posts: 25806
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 12:44 am
About me: Cantankerous grump
Location: Ignore lithpt
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by Hermit » Mon Mar 27, 2017 4:04 pm

Forty Two wrote:
Tero wrote:Toddlers vs terrorists
Noting that “in most cases, the toddlers are killing or injuring themselves,” Ingraham counted 58 total toddler-involved shootings in 2015 as of 17 December of that year. In 19 instances toddlers shot and killed themselves, and in two others toddlers shot and killed other individuals. That brought the total of toddler-involved shooting deaths in the United States in 2015 to 21.

By contrast, if we counted both the Chattanooga shootings and San Bernardino as instances of Islamic terrorism, that would mean 19 Americans were killed in instances of suspected, reported, or potential Islamic terrorism in 2015. Counting American victims of the November 2015 Paris attacks brought that number up to 20.
http://www.snopes.com/toddlers-killed-a ... errorists/
As a result, western countries, particularly the US, should focus their energies on accidental injuries and deaths, rather than devote energy on preventing terrorist organizations from developing and obtaining the means of carrying out large-scale terrorist attacks.
Oh, just look at that! A strawman. :roll:

If you are trying to make that an either/or issue you are the only one.
Forty Two wrote:Oh, and this is perfect for the "Only in America" thread, because let's face it, this happens only in America. Every other western industrialized country has their priorities much straighter.
Feel free to compare the rate of toddler-triggered ( :hehe: ) gun deaths in the USA with that of any other western industrialised country. Go on. You know you want to - if you really think there'll be any statistics that you might be able to massage until they support what you're trying to say here.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73015
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by JimC » Mon Mar 27, 2017 8:19 pm

None of the toddler-style comparisons implies that zero effort should go into straightforward, effective intelligence and police work to detect and prevent terrorist acts.

It simply is a useful counter-balance to hysteria generated for political purposes.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by pErvinalia » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:07 am

Forty Two wrote:
pErvin wrote:I think the point is to put the relative danger in perspective. Attempt to get those who are driven by fear to try and get some perspective.
Body counts are not the only way to assess relative danger. The potential damage is a factor when analyzing risk. A .001 percent chance of another 9/11 style attack is worth more investment than a 1% chance of a slip and fall, because of a view of the consequences. Let's call the damage from a slip and fall death at, say $1,000,000 for a round number, and let's call the expected damage from a 9/11 style attack as like $15 billion just for infrastructure, with 3,000 lives, and let's call them each a $1,000,000 too, so that's like $18 billion dollars right there. So, even if we limit the damages caused by a 9/11 attack to a million per person and the property damage directly caused (not factoring in long term losses, the effect on the economy overall, etc.), its far more important to stop the highly speculative, but highly damaging 9/11 type attack.
Most people's fears aren't driven by costs. They are driven by harm. People need to understand that you are far more likely to die from thousands of other things than terrorism. Therefore spending so much effort and time fearing an unlikely event is irrational.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by Forty Two » Tue Mar 28, 2017 2:33 pm

pErvin wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
pErvin wrote:I think the point is to put the relative danger in perspective. Attempt to get those who are driven by fear to try and get some perspective.
Body counts are not the only way to assess relative danger. The potential damage is a factor when analyzing risk. A .001 percent chance of another 9/11 style attack is worth more investment than a 1% chance of a slip and fall, because of a view of the consequences. Let's call the damage from a slip and fall death at, say $1,000,000 for a round number, and let's call the expected damage from a 9/11 style attack as like $15 billion just for infrastructure, with 3,000 lives, and let's call them each a $1,000,000 too, so that's like $18 billion dollars right there. So, even if we limit the damages caused by a 9/11 attack to a million per person and the property damage directly caused (not factoring in long term losses, the effect on the economy overall, etc.), its far more important to stop the highly speculative, but highly damaging 9/11 type attack.
Most people's fears aren't driven by costs. They are driven by harm. People need to understand that you are far more likely to die from thousands of other things than terrorism. Therefore spending so much effort and time fearing an unlikely event is irrational.
That's got little to do with what government policy should be on the matter, which should take into account expected value of risk. The likelihood of dying in a nuclear explosion is miniscule. But, if it happens, it's world-shaking in its effects. Therefore, I would hope that the State is spending a bit more in resources addressing that issue than whether there are unfilled potholes on my street or whether my bathtub is too slippery. Although, i will acknowledge that potholes and slips-and-falls are far more relevant to my daily life than nuclear arms.

it is not some irrational "fear" gripping the populace here. These folks make it sound like the population is running around pulling out their hair, just fearing a Muslim behind every tree with a scimitar gleaming in the moonlight. That's not the way it is here, although it serves the purpose of those activists who sell that notion to suggest that everyone is such a bunch of raving racists, afraid of anything darker than caramel, because then they can push for things to "quell" that "climate of fear and hatred."
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
laklak
Posts: 20981
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:07 pm
About me: My preferred pronoun is "Massah"
Location: Tannhauser Gate
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by laklak » Tue Mar 28, 2017 3:54 pm

I haven't seen this climate of fear and hatred, am I living in the wrong place?
Yeah well that's just, like, your opinion, man.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by Forty Two » Tue Mar 28, 2017 4:05 pm

laklak wrote:I haven't seen this climate of fear and hatred, am I living in the wrong place?
If you have seen someone refuse to use the pronoun "zhi" or draw a picture of the Prophet Muhammad, then you are well-acquainted with the climate of fear and hatred....and don't get me started on Blasphemy Day.... my god, the hate... the unmitigated hate...
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Mar 29, 2017 1:51 am

Forty Two wrote:
pErvin wrote:
Forty Two wrote:
pErvin wrote:I think the point is to put the relative danger in perspective. Attempt to get those who are driven by fear to try and get some perspective.
Body counts are not the only way to assess relative danger. The potential damage is a factor when analyzing risk. A .001 percent chance of another 9/11 style attack is worth more investment than a 1% chance of a slip and fall, because of a view of the consequences. Let's call the damage from a slip and fall death at, say $1,000,000 for a round number, and let's call the expected damage from a 9/11 style attack as like $15 billion just for infrastructure, with 3,000 lives, and let's call them each a $1,000,000 too, so that's like $18 billion dollars right there. So, even if we limit the damages caused by a 9/11 attack to a million per person and the property damage directly caused (not factoring in long term losses, the effect on the economy overall, etc.), its far more important to stop the highly speculative, but highly damaging 9/11 type attack.
Most people's fears aren't driven by costs. They are driven by harm. People need to understand that you are far more likely to die from thousands of other things than terrorism. Therefore spending so much effort and time fearing an unlikely event is irrational.
That's got little to do with what government policy should be on the matter,
Who's talking about government policy? As usual it is pointless trying to discuss anything with you.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
JimC
The sentimental bloke
Posts: 73015
Joined: Thu Feb 26, 2009 7:58 am
About me: To be serious about gin requires years of dedicated research.
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by JimC » Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:04 am

A fair chunk of government policy in the west (ably supported by sensationalist media) is to exaggerate the terrorist threat to both distract voters from other issues, and to ramp up support for ever more intrusive security legislation...

Saying that does not imply that governments should not be using effective, rational policing methods to minimise the harm done by terrorists, nor that fundamentalist Islam doesn't deserve to be opposed with force.
Nurse, where the fuck's my cardigan?
And my gin!

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Only in America

Post by pErvinalia » Wed Mar 29, 2017 2:05 am

Yep.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests