Rufty, you are utterly wicked.

For those too lazy to click the link, it's Amaretto and Tirimisu Chocolate Coffee Beans.

The parent comment (nothing but a blockquote the grandparent) is the very definition of "-1 Redundant".

You never seeing them doesn't mean they don't exist.
1: They're boring stories. "News flash: a man was NOT robbed today. When the thug saw his victim draw a weapon, he ran."

2: The vast majority of these incidents are never reported. Even where it's legal to defend oneself with a weapon, there's paperwork, approximately zero chance of catching the perpetrator, and always the fear that you've broken some law somewhere. Not to mention, you might end up getting sued by the perpetrator.

You have nothing to gain and everything to lose from reporting these confrontations. It has happened to me a few times in my life, and I certainly never reported any of them, even though local laws would absolutely be on my side. My lawyer agrees, by the way.

3: The big news outfits are strongly in favor of regulating guns, and isolated, trivial stories of people protecting themselves with guns can confuse the intellectually challenged voting public, especially in 'flyover states'. It might cause the masses to doubt the wisdom of entrusting the government with a monopoly on violence.

Pretty much all the mass shootings are stopped when somebody else with a gun shows up.

If you don't like the idea of teachers and sundry school officials having guns, and want only the police to have them, the answer is simple:

Deputize some teachers. Then they're police, too. This is a win-win, as the students might behave a bit better. Punching a cop is a whole lot worse than punching a regular teacher.

Killing the victim doesn't prevent the rape, it just encourages the rapist to repeat.

Rape is often agonizing and the vagina and or anus can get torn.

Often the wall between the two gets torn, and operations are required or the victim will spend the rest of her life leaking feces out her now combined vaginal/rectal opening.

Without the wall being torn, the rectum will often prolapse, which is hideously painful, and if the rectal muscles are torn, the victim has to wear a diaper the rest of her life, and always smells like it.

Herpes, ghonnorea, syphlis, hepatitis, e coli infections,

agony while defacating, disfigured vagina, disfigured anus, crippling fear...

And in many countries, raped women are considered adulterers and stoned. The men are generally considered victims of their natural appetites, who were only acting reasonably. Like a cat would if you showed it raw meat. If the women had been properly careful and not flaunted themselves, they would have had no problem, so it's their fault.

Now, that said, would you rather get beat up, or beat down and ass raped by a baseball bat loaded with communicable diseases?

I'll take a beating to unconsciousness any day of the week.

In the least damaging forcible rape you're going to encounter,

Please imagine being bent over by someone approximately twice your body mass, pressed face first into asphalt, then having a baseball bat repeatedly shoved in and pulled out of your ass for about five minutes.

As your asshole rips the blood will provide a lubricant. So will the shit, which will also, unfortunately, get rubbed deeply into your ripped rectum, providing you with infections.

Then, the baseball bat dumps a load of ejaculate, which will quite possibly contain any of a host of diseases.

Oh, and you're also pregnant now.

A long time ago I knew and loved a woman who had been gang raped as a 14 year old girl, lost her front teeth from the punching, and 9 months later gave birth to a baby girl, who went up for adoption.

20 minutes of inconvienence?

Go Fuck Yourself

Know thine enemy.

If you've been having trouble sleeping too soundly, or getting scammed because you're too trusting, I recommend the book: Without Conscience.
http://www.amazon.com/Without-Conscience-Disturbing-World-Psychopaths/dp/1572304510

Written by a shrink, he explains what happens (and doesn't happen) in the mind of a sociopath, with plenty of examples.

The rapist mentality is covered too.

Interesting point. I remember very clearly the "CHEAP" was one of the rallying words against the dreaded "Saturday Night Special"

Never thought about it before, but if you fear an economically repressed group, 'cheap' really would be a problem. I guess it's direct descendants are all the schemes to raise the price of guns and ammunition.

It's not like your survivalist, gun nut neighbor is going to use all 17 of his .45's, 8 of his 9mm's and 5 AR-15's on you at once.

Investing an hour of speed reloading practice before your murder spree would turn even a cheap ass revolver into a high capacity killing weapon. It isn't like speed loaders cost much, and the .223 is purpose designed to wound, whereas a .357 magnum revolver (or a .44 cannon) would pretty much guarantee a fatality with any center mass shot.

Of course, if it's cheap and light enough, a cheap revolver can be considered a disposable 6 round magazine itself.

I disagree with the premise. I strongly believe that suicide is a fundamental human right. It's the one decision that is fundamentally yours.

Who should have the right to force me to keep living if I don't want to?

Actually, Lord Kano,

What I find nearly impossible to believe is that this discussion is even going on.

It's refreshing to see two sides of an argument here.

"Just because you've joined the Tea Party doesn't mean you have to stop hating Republicans." -- Most Tea Partiers

"If the druggies could ever accept the gun nuts, and the gun nuts could accept the druggies, we libertarians would never lose an election again." Penn Jillette, my hero

"Being a libertarian means you lose every election." Super athiest-libertarian Penn, again.

Why the hell do you want to claim the libertarains are the idiots? I'm libertarian, and the government being behind this never occurred to me.

No US government conspiracy can survive Happy Hour at the local bar.

  "Conspiracy? A bunch of government types keeping a secret regarding murder? I'm amazed when those dipshits manage to get me my paycheck every week. They'd all sell each other out the first microsecond any prosecutor, or Oprah, offered immunity or a book deal." -- quote by a guy who knew what he was talking about.

I'm leaning foreign.

The simultaneous blast at the library makes it highly unlikely that it's the work of a lone nutjob. Grouped domestic nutjobs tend to be together to watch the mayhem unfold. This seems more to me like fairly independent guys going their separate ways to make whatever mayhem they can at a pre-arranged date and time.

Domestic suspects:
Tea Party?
In spite of the news heads already blaming them, this isn't going to lower taxes, or get the government to stop spending like a pimp on meth.

Drug gangs?
They gain nothing.

'Right Wing Extremists'?
The favorite bugaboo of NBC and CNN, remember, Timothy McVeigh bombed the FEDERAL building, and was upset to find he'd killed kids in a daycare. Obviously marathoners are going to have their kids at the finish line. Bombs in Boston won't turn up birth certificates, college transcripts or get the big O impeached. It'll consolidate his power. When the New York Times building explodes, or George Soros's yacht sinks, then it'll be time to look here.

Anarchists?
No idiotic, rambling manifesto with lousy grammar yet, so no.

Foreign suspects:
Mexican Drug Cartels?
Why. Absolutely nothing to gain, and a US holy war on them that Mexico's government would pop champagne corks over. This entire attack will be horrendously bad for anybody trying to smuggle anything. Drug dealing lives and dies by it's smugglers; bombings get people searched. All the stupid drug cartels are dead now. "There's no such thing as bad publicity" doesn't apply to criminal organizations.

North Korea?
It's the 100th birthday of Kim IL Sung, but no. This kind of attack would almost certainly be in South Korea, like the last hundred. Hawaii or Guam at the farthest. Japan if the get really insane. Not Boston.

Cuba, or Venezuala?
The worst Obama has to worry about from Spanish speaking communist dictators is mouth herpes from all his kissing.

IRA?
Serial bombing smacks of the IRA, and so does famously Catholic Boston, but the IRA would space the blasts farther apart, and there's no way the'd have 5/7 duds. And the Marathon isn't Ulster, or even Protestant. They're also mayhem for money, and neither side of their religious war will be revved up by this attack.

Jihadis

The attack seems designed to generate the maximum publicity and terror. The sheer number of bombs left in an area absolutely full of extremely high quality cameras (news) seems to be designed to make a large statement without much concern for the consequences of capture.

That speaks of religious fundamentalism to me, since there aren't many earthly returns to getting caught. If they were closely coordinated, I'd expect the bombs to have been the same, purely for logistical reasons, rather than an incendiary at the library and an apparent string of IED's at the marathon finish line.

Independent attacks at the same time is the MO of Jihadis in the middle east/asia. So are the IED's. So is the East Coast. So are the badly sync'd blasts. To really do damage, they would have timed it better. 15 seconds isn't time to get emergency responders into the 2nd blast area. 5/7 duds, worse than 2/3's failure rate is another independent jihadi trademark (world trade center bombs, shoe bomber, underwear bomber, ...)

I lean Jihadi.

Fear not. As the book "Dead Men Do Tell Tales" chronicles, the only hope of getting away with murder is that nobody cares enough to find all the clues. This one will be investigated exhaustively, and crammed in our faces every day as a reminder that only big brother can protect us.

They couldn't have NOT taken the bait. I mean, if you're a strategist, would YOU have put all those ships in one place? It's not rocket science. Willful negligence is a valid military and political tactic.

I must disagree.

The Japanese attacked Pearl in a huge gamble precisely because it WAS unexpected. You can't seriously expect anyone to believe that the Pacific Fleet commander stood by and ignored an incoming attack. At the time, commanders had extreme autonomy, and NONE of them would sacrifice their own fleet by letting an attack come in unopposed. It's the very same thing as the 9/11 truthers. The plot would have to have had a minimum of dozens of people, all of whom under the rank of President would have been tried and hung for treason at the next change of administration. Hell, JFK faced impeachment for boinking Marilyn Monroe.

(9/11 would have required thousands as an inside job, and if you don't think the current administration, which blames the former for everything, would hesitate to arrest and hang Bush, Cheney and Co. for mass murder... well, you weren't awake during the last presidential campaign. Hanging the former administration for treason would sink the Republican party forever. Q.E.D., POTUS got nothing, therefore there is nothing.)

Air power at the time was completely underestimated. The perceived threat was from battleships' and cruisers' big guns, and the planes were simply seen as harassers/long range eyeballs. As to the new radar system operator's warnings, it was a new guy, and nobody expected an invasion of Hawaii. Also, radar was very, very new, and took a LOT of interpretation to understand what was going on. It wasn't like today where you look at a computer generated screen on a map. It was wavy lines on an oscilloscope, and it had plenty of room for error.

We knew the Japanese would attack somewhere, but with the entire pacific to choose from, Pearl Harbor seemed suicidally stupid. Generally, in the opening of a fight, you take out all the easy guys on the fringes first by surprise and overwhelming force, before they can all be pulled together into a task force and come kick your ass.

Going for the quick knockout blow in the heart of the enemy is always a huge risk, because he has the home field advantage, and zero length supply lines. If you even fight to a bloody draw, you still have to limp back home with the pissed off enemy harassing your fleet, and gobbling up any wounded stragglers at near zero cost. The Japanese made a huge gamble at Pearl, and it paid off, but it could have lost them the entire war, very, very easily.

So no, the strategists weren't stupid rounding up the fleet in a well protected harbor, centrally located so it could sally forth to wherever it was needed. It was extremely well protected from the anticipated threat, and sabotage was their biggest worry at Pearl. And there did turn out to be plenty of sabotage and espionage throughout the war, it was all hushed up at the time.

There are several ways the Japanese could have kicked the US's asses out of the Pacific. A minor change in the attack on December 7, 1941, of hitting Schofield Barracks and Red Hill first instead of Pearl would have destroyed the US Pacific fleet, but they didn't think of it, and lost the war because of it.

Remember Napoleon 'never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity'.

Goooooooooooooooood!

For $125K, I could deliver Occulus Rift + Google Glasses in a month, and still have enough left over for your education. And the month is only to find some current owners who will part with their treasure.

Porn. You're doing it wrong. His wife isn't whom I will be looking at.