Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
Take advantage of Black Friday with 15% off sitewide with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" on Slashdot Deals (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:What idiocy (Score 1) 311

You have stated as fact that nobody ever successfully uses a firearm to prevent a violent attack, and that a knife is more likely to work for this purpose.

Incorrect. I have stated as fact that the fear of individuals possibly carrying firearms and defending themselves is not a significant factor in the criminal mind. The object intent of a criminal is to overcome a victim, not to have a Mexican stand-off; they don't announce themselves. If you're not waliking around holding a large firearm leveled at whoever approaches you, you're a target; you'll have to draw your firearm, and a good grappler can control your arm so you can't safely point it away from yourself and at them.

Knives happen to have sharp edges, so trying to take one away is less of a winning proposition.

You seem to be arguing that the average person is a sociopath who is willing to just watch others be hurt.

One mechanism is called the Bystander Effect; there are several others. We actively discourage vigilantism.

There is solid research estimating that firearms are used in the USA about two million times each year to prevent a violent crime. Most of these "defensive gun uses" do not involve anyone being killed or even anyone firing the gun; the defender deterred the assailant just by having a gun.

At which point you bring up a whole lot of inconsistent research that manage to conclude something with a 312.5% margin of error and with extremely poor experimental design, and from a biased source to boot.

Did you know global warming is bunk, too? Exxon-Mobil published a study. There is no pollution from coal at all.

I don't blame the victims the way you seem to

You're a retard.

I explained the role of society in deterrence, and you claim victim-blaming. I specifically said the victim has NO POWER over the situation, and it's the fault of everyone else in the world.

Sally got raped. Tim, Bob, George, Amanda, Mark, Joseph, and Bill all stood by and did nothing. You claim I'm blaming Sally for getting raped by complaining that Tim, Bob, George, Amanda, Mark, Joseph, and Bill all stood by and did nothing. Are Tim, Bob, George, Amanda, Mark, Joseph, and Bill the victim?

You extended too far with your bullshit art. You got burned.

Comment Re:What idiocy (Score 1) 311

Nobody fears a swift death at the hands of a victim. That's a stupid argument. Victims are harmless, armed or not; you take them by surprise and you take them down. If they have weapons, you take them away before they can use them--this is hilariously easy when you attack someone and they turn out to have a firearm. A knife is actually more of a difficult proposition.

*Society* has the power to reduce crime. The United States society tolerates crime: if you attack someone else, it's not my business; I'll keep my head down and stay safe. This is why witnesses just vanish, deciding not to testify; this is why the Virginia Tech shootings had a dude walk into a class full of people, shoot them one by one while they all sat compliant or cowered behind chairs, and then move to the next class. Nobody stands up to put a stop to it, because they might get shot a few seconds earlier.

The threat level of a society which will collectively hunt you down is enormous. Watch someone murder a gypsy once. The police have about 8 minutes to find that guy; after that, they're just looking for the body. People are afraid of the mafia because messing with the mafia means the mob hunts you down. Murder is one thing; murdering a cop is wholly different, and you will die before your trial. Nobody messes with these people, because you immediately become the hunted.

A society of armed loners who only care about themselves is a society of targets.

Comment Re:It is a myth! (Score 1) 242

In other words, US workers should be happy to get screwed.

More distorted thinking.

Worker productivity has gone up since 2000, but not the median family income in constant dollars, and you appear to be saying it should go down. More distorted thinking.

And incorrect facts. How does the median family have more shiny toys now, yet less purchasing power?

When everyone is getting more, people tend not to care too much about what other people are getting.

You've obviously never seen someone quite content encounter someone who had more than them. Folks think they're getting a good deal or they're well-cared-for, they're happy; they see that someone else has 10x as much, suddenly they're pissed off. Even old people pull that shit, if they haven't learned not to care yet. I've seen a 60-year-old woman light up when she got two scoops of ice cream, so happy and excited; then the woman 2 seats down was given a bowl with 3 and the old bitch freaked out and started screaming. "Why does she get three and I only get two?!" Two was enough before... isn't this how a four-year-old reacts? Grow up, grandma.

It's why we don't discuss salaries at work, though that's been debated: people tend to not care about what other coworkers are making; they bitch more that the guy at the top is making $25M and they only get $0.74M.

Comment Re:Once you start relying on FDA.... (Score 1) 514

Glyphosate is less-toxic than table salt and less-toxic than many alternatives. A lot of organic farming pesticides are highly toxic, broad target, and long halflife. That means organic produce has a lot more toxic chemical content than regular produce with synthetic pesticides; the pesticides kill a wide array of insects and small animals, including earth worms and bees; and they wash into the ground or the rivers and stay there for years, instead of weeks or days. People still whine about pesticides in regular food and go with the highly-toxic organic food.

Unix is the worst operating system; except for all others. -- Berry Kercheval