RANT: i am obese and on a phone

[Farley1324]

What exactly does "screening for mental illness" mean?

I think that's the million dollar question

[mjw8204]

+ I don't see the US bombing inside of their own borders. So tanks could roll through and level cities, all the while it'd be a bloody battle between citizens and infantry, etc.

It's too bad that our concerns over our own government suppressing us military don't incite the same passion toward other countries subverting us economically. Between the two, only one is actually taking place right now.

[mjw8204]

I think that's the million dollar question

I keep seeing this put forth as a solution, but I can't think of a viable way it could be put into practice. Like I said the other night, there could be serious implications for any action associated with mental illness.

[chazzy1864]

I keep seeing this put forth as a solution, but I can't think of a viable way it could be put into practice. Like I said the other night, there could be serious implications for any action associated with mental illness.

Would also have to determine what is actually considered a mental illness "threat" or so (not sure what word would be good there). But a person on a simple anti-anxiety prescription wouldn't really be lumped into the crowds of people with paranoid delusion, schizophrenia, or god knows what else.

I'm sure mental health is the key issue behind these people committing the massacres. But just putting up a list of names with the name of some prescription drug they're taken doesn't tell us anything. You could list a gunman using mobic/meloxicam and most people would be like, "Oh my god! He was on prescription medication, clearly he was nuts!" .... it is a prescription anti-inflammatory (often given for tendinitis).

[mjw8204]

But just putting up a list of names with the name of some prescription drug they're taken doesn't tell us anything.

Exactly. That's why I even bothered to get involved in that awful discussion with Farley the other night. People need to think about these things instead of just unquestioningly jumping on the mental illness bandwagon.

Also, the "lay" person who doesn't have a fundamental grasp on statistics and research methods makes all sorts of wrongly reasoned conclusions about data. When someone tells me, "there is clearly a correlation between X and Y," my response is usually, "so what?" There are all kinds of ways to skew numbers or misrepresent data, or simply misunderstand the story the numbers are telling. It is much more challenging to demonstrate a clear causal relationship than it is a simple correlation.

[GREENFEATHER]

Jerky Diary Day #2

Jerky is cooking. I think I may have used too much whorechestersauce. Only time will tell. Manly out.

Use some soy sauce mixed with it, moderates the taste and pound out after cooked.

Any Trek fans here (besides Ossy, of course)

Next Generation only here.

Piers really has no business interviewing people – he's useless at it. He's also not an American so I'm not surprised that so many are telling him to GTFO.

There's quite a few that are trying to get his sorry ass deported.

As for the government turning on us. We might not win, but we'll sure as hell let them know there's a big assed dog in the fight.

[kvk1]

[therorschach]

We get it. You get around with other men. This is of no surprise.

[chazzy1864]

Exactly. That's why I even bothered to get involved in that awful discussion with Farley the other night. People need to think about these things instead of just unquestioningly jumping on the mental illness bandwagon.

Also, the "lay" person who doesn't have a fundamental grasp on statistics and research methods makes all sorts of wrongly reasoned conclusions about data. When someone tells me, "there is clearly a correlation between X and Y," my response is usually, "so what?" There are all kinds of ways to skew numbers or misrepresent data, or simply misunderstand the story the numbers are telling. It is much more challenging to demonstrate a clear causal relationship than it is a simple correlation.

In the words of the great D1, " Correlation does not equal causation."

[ZoranM]

+ I don't see the US bombing inside of their own borders. So tanks could roll through and level cities, all the while it'd be a bloody battle between citizens and infantry, etc.

I hope you're right. Because you probably can't imagine how ridiculous this, or that argument generally sounds to the people outside of US.

[chazzy1864]

I hope you're right. Because you probably can't imagine how ridiculous this, or that argument generally sounds to the people outside of US.

I'm not saying it is likely or probable. Just saying that is why the 2nd amendment was put in place. To keep a tyrannical gov't in check. Then the counter argument is always that, "Yeah, like some redneck with a few hunting rifles will fight back the tanks and missiles."

[kvk1]

I hope you're right. Because you probably can't imagine how ridiculous this, or that argument generally sounds to the people outside of US.

lol

[VoxExMachina]

I hope you're right. Because you probably can't imagine how ridiculous this, or that argument generally sounds to the people outside of US.

One could make the argument that the idea of the U.S. Government turning against the people sounds "ridiculous" because the 2nd Amendment has done such a good job keeping the government in check thus far. There's really no saying how history may or may not have gone differently.

But IMO, it's moreso because the Founding Fathers were some wise mo-fo's and put together a pretty damn good foundation (of which the 2nd is a part). Best not to erode pieces of it here and there. Stick to the script.

[theshoupguy]

Syria.

[ZoranM]

I'm not saying it is likely or probable. Just saying that is why the 2nd amendment was put in place. To keep a tyrannical gov't in check. Then the counter argument is always that, "Yeah, like some redneck with a few hunting rifles will fight back the tanks and missiles."

One could make the argument that the idea of the U.S. Government turning against the people sounds "ridiculous" because the 2nd Amendment has done such a good job keeping the government in check thus far. There's really no saying how history may or may not have gone differently.

But IMO, it's moreso because the Founding Fathers were some wise mo-fo's and put together a pretty damn good foundation (of which the 2nd is a part). Best not to erode pieces of it here and there. Stick to the script.

I don't know the specifics, of both the historical US documents and laws and current gun control issue. Only the bits and pieces I pick up make me wanna say like 10k words. But it's probably not my place to enter these discussions in depth. No argument really surprises me though.

[Miketoc]

Just telling it how it is, Mikeypoo.

Outside of sport where I do enjoy seeing Australians beat Brits, I don't have anything negative to say about the UK. I like their culture and I get their humor.

I just think Piers is a windbag who should STFU about guns already since he's a) not American, and b) clearly isn't interested in hearing what the other side has to say.

You lost me here.

[Miketoc]

I'm not saying it is likely or probable. Just saying that is why the 2nd amendment was put in place. To keep a tyrannical gov't in check. Then the counter argument is always that, "Yeah, like some redneck with a few hunting rifles will fight back the tanks and missiles."

Well if you saw Borne Legacy, you would know that with a semi-automatic rifle you could fight back missiles. Or at least the UAV's that fire them

[skizbees]

Eye surgery went okay ( note to self: topical anesthesia of one special eye drop and nasal oxygen wasn't as numbed as I could have been.) Going from eye gouged out, bloodshot, to raging case of pinkeye looks wise in four days has been interesting. Can't drive til the 24th.

[Miketoc]

In the words of the great D1, " Correlation does not equal causation."

Was it this thread where somebody posted the autism / organic food correlation?

[Miketoc]

I think I saw it on a google feed:



EDIT: Should probably give a source: http://boingboing.net/2013/01/01/cor...utism-dia.html

[VoxExMachina]

Zoran, you'd have to live here to really assess whether you think the laws the way they stand are positive or negative. For the most part, I feel perfectly comfortable with people owning guns. I might feel differently if I lived in a very high crime city (though I visit Detroit a number of times per year, and it's got a pretty high crime rate). People go about their business every day and don't come in touch with guns or gun crimes. If you don't live here, it's easy to get the impression that people are dodging shoot-outs on the street on a regular basis.

While it's a low probability that the government would ever turn into a tyranny here, I'd still rather Americans have the right to keep and bear arms than not. If you think about it, there are very few who call the shots in the top level of the government. Congress, the Supreme Court, even the President don't have any "real" power - it's only the rule of law and pattern of obedience that gives them power and authority...and the backing of those who control the military.

Theoretically, couldn't the Joint Chiefs of Staff, President, CIA Director, etc. collude with the intent of a coup? That's how it's been done countless times by dictators. (Granted, I think it would be tougher to pull off here, due to Americans having a strong sense of not following unlawful orders.) But if such a group did pull off something like that, who would resist them? The Canadians? The French? It usually sounds like tinfoil hat nonsense, but you do have to kind of wonder how easy it could be.

I believe a degree of power should always reside in the hands of the people to act as a deterrent. Further, then, our government can act as a deterrent against the governments of our allies turning against their peoples. So again theoretically, the 2nd Amendment may be helping keep all of NATO free, and allowing the peoples of those countries to have the freedom to speak against Americans having guns.

Mind Blown?

[mjw8204]

Was it this thread where somebody posted the autism / organic food correlation?

A professor I had years ago illustrated the problem of correlation nicely by pointing out that there is a strong positive correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks in certain parts of the world.

[Miketoc]

Eye surgery went okay ( note to self: topical anesthesia of one special eye drop and nasal oxygen wasn't as numbed as I could have been.) Going from eye gouged out, bloodshot, to raging case of pinkeye looks wise in four days has been interesting. Can't drive til the 24th.

Glad to hear, hope recovery is fast and smooth.

Vox: Have you seen the movie Under Siege? As long as Denzel Washington exists, something like that cannot happen here.

I will only feel save if all guns and vehicles are mysteriously vaporized by some unknown alien race. Going back to the old days where there weren't any mass murders by gun toting crazies. Plus I want to wear giant metal gauntlets and carry around a Braveheart sword.

[Miketoc]

A professor of mine illustrated the problem of correlation nicely by pointing out that there is a strong positive correlation between ice cream sales and shark attacks in certain parts of the world.

Yeah basically same thing as that graph, only the correlation coefficient of those two is almost perfect.

[VoxExMachina]

I will only feel save if all guns and vehicles are mysteriously vaporized by some unknown alien race. Going back to the old days where there weren't any mass murders by gun toting crazies. Plus I want to wear giant metal gauntlets and carry around a Braveheart sword.

I know you joke, but it's been pointed out that when governments go bad, they kill a hell of a lot more people than any sort of normal "gun crime". If keeping the checks and balances intact costs 11,000 gun crimes a year, it doesn't sound so bad put in that context.

It wasn't any different in the middle ages. It's just that then power came through the point of a sword, not the end of a gun.

[therorschach]

Vox: Have you seen the movie Under Siege? As long as Denzel Washington exists, something like that cannot happen here.

It was "The Siege". "Under Siege" was a Steven Seagal movie. Also, I'm therorschach, not Vox.

[Miketoc]

I know you joke, but it's been pointed out that when governments go bad, they kill a hell of a lot more people than any sort of normal "gun crime". If keeping the checks and balances intact costs 11,000 gun crimes a year, it doesn't sound so bad put in that context.

It wasn't any different in the middle ages. It's just that then power came through the point of a sword, not the end of a gun.

Damnit Frep, that is what I was alluding to

[Miketoc]

It was "The Siege". "Under Siege" had Steven Seagal. Also, I'm therorschach, not Vox.

Yeah like I said, The Siege.

[Miketoc]

Why do I feel like Turco?

[therorschach]

Yeah like I said, The Siege.

No you didn't. You said "Under Siege".