Guest nimue Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 nimue wrote: > Lawrence Glickman wrote: >> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 09:27:39 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Lawrence Glickman wrote: >>>> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 01:15:54 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> I have to say, it sure sounds like you have been living wrong. I >>>>> know plenty of people your age who have never found themselves in >>>>> the situations you described. What on earth were you doing wrong >>>>> that you kept finding yourself in them? I teach at an inner-city >>>>> high school and even there we have some kids who are in fights >>>>> every week and others who have rarely or never been in fights. I >>>>> always tell my kids if you keep finding yourself in fights, you >>>>> are doing something wrong; you are doing something to create them. >>>>> Your post reeks of pride in yourself for having those fights and >>>>> contempt for anyone who hasn't fought as much as you. Foolish. >>>>> It sounds like you are compelled to create a fight and survive to >>>>> convince yourself that you have any value. I could be wrong, but >>>>> that's what it sounds like. >>>> >>>> You could be wrong. Big of you to admit to that. I was on my own >>>> and on the street at a very young age, after my dysfunctional >>>> family fell apart and I was left with no choice in the matter but >>>> to leave that train wreck and head out on my own. >>> >>> It sounds like you have had a hard life and I feel for you about >>> that, but I know other people who have hard lives, too, and haven't >>> had to fight the way you have. Again, I teach in an inner-city >>> school and I have seen kids who have been through absolute hell but >>> still, as teenagers, have learned how to survive by succeeding, not >>> fighting. They've learned to live their lives in such a way that >>> they stay out of those situations and even though that isn't easy, >>> they have managed it. >>>> >>>> From that early age on, it was predator and prey, with myself being >>>> the prey living in a large city. >>> >>> Oh, lord. I hear your story from the gang-bangers all the time. So >>> dramatic. Is that all you have to be proud of? Kids in the exact >>> same situations (or worse) as yours or those gang-bangers have >>> learned to navigate life in such a way that they avoid that and >>> succeed. I am NOT saying it's easy to do that. In fact, it is >>> probably more difficult to do that than it is to fight, which is >>> almost expected -- that's why I really respect the kids who have >>> learned how not to fight, how to avoid fighting and bad situations >>> and just do their best. >>>> >>>> Yes I am proud to still be around. Lesser men/women wouldn't have >>>> made it (survived). >>> >>> Sigh. What does <<lesser men/women>> mean? You have such pride in >>> your fighting skills that I think you have created fights to prove >>> yourself to yourself. As I have said, there are other ways than >>> fighting. That is not the only way to survive and I still say if >>> you continually find yourself in those situations, you are doing >>> something wrong. >>>> >>>> Lg >> >> Yes you can hide under your bed or in your closet. > > When did I say to do that? When? Never. That is NOT the only other > option. Heck, the future valedictorian of the high school where I > work has been raised pretty much in homeless shelters by a mother who > honestly is pretty dreadful. This kid has been very successful in > spite of all, is very involved in school activities and trips, and > never fights. > >> It is highly safe >> in there. I go out into the world, where it is less safe. > > So? So do my successful inner-city kids. Every day. They go from > their neighborhoods to school and back just like the > gang-bangers.They are all from the same neighborhood, after all. > However, the non-fighters go other places, too, such as cultural > events in the city -- Broadway shows, concerts, museums, etc. Some > have even been to Europe. Trust me when I say that we don't choose > the fighters for these trips. The kids who have learned to survive > without fighting go to way, way more places than the kids who don't > know how to do anything without fighting. Well, the gang-bangers do > tend to see jail while the other kids don't. > > >> I go where >> I want to, when I want to. I give myself this freedom. > > Good for you. However, one does not have to fight to do that. The > non-fighting kids are in the exact same neighborhoods as the fighters. > Trust me when I say the non-fighters are going places and the fighters > aren't. > >> I EARN this >> freedom, and everything that goes with it. > > I guess you earned it in the only way YOU could. However, that > certainly is not the only way. >> >> To you that is a mistake. > > No, going where you want is not a mistake. Creating fights is. > >> I should spend my entire life in a library. > > When did I say that? Never. If you admit that you can survive and > thrive without fighting all the time you will have to admit you have > made some bad choices and that would just be too painful. I want to add something to this. Perhaps you could not have made choices other than the ones you made, because of how you are. Maybe you can't change how you are. However, not everyone is the same as you. Others in the same situation as you (or worse situations) are capable of finding other ways to survive and succeed. It's offensive that you think YOUR way is the only way and that anyone who doesn't do things your way is wrong. I guess your way was right for you. I guess it was the best you could do. However, your way isn't right for everyone, nor is it best. I don't know why you can't acknowledge that. > >> Get fucking real. > > I am real. Why don't you come work in a Title 1 school in Brooklyn, > tough guy? >> >> Lg -- nimue Perspective and proportion are the first casualties of hysteria. Steven A. Shaw Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:22:39 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: > >I am real. Why don't you come work in a Title 1 school in Brooklyn, tough >guy? >> >> Lg You have a lot of chutzpah criticizing me for doing what I did to STAY ALIVE. This just shows how ignorant you are. Judge not lest you be judged, and since you have judged me, it is now time for me to judge you. You Fail D- Lg Quote
Guest Notan Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 Lawrence Glickman wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:22:39 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >> I am real. Why don't you come work in a Title 1 school in Brooklyn, tough >> guy? >>> Lg > > You have a lot of chutzpah criticizing me for doing what I did to STAY > ALIVE. No more than you have for criticizing the way others live their lives. -- Notan Quote
Guest nimue Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 Lawrence Glickman wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:22:39 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >> >> I am real. Why don't you come work in a Title 1 school in Brooklyn, >> tough guy? >>> >>> Lg > > You have a lot of chutzpah criticizing me for doing what I did to STAY > ALIVE. I am not criticizing you for doing what you had to to stay alive. I am criticizing you for acting as if that is the ONLY way to survive such circumstances. How arrogant of you -- your way is the only way? It's not. I also think the way you brag about all the fights you have had is pathetic. Don't you have anything else to be proud of, anything else that shows you are a real man? As I said, if you are always getting into fights, you are doing something wrong. >This just shows how ignorant you are. Judge not lest you be > judged, Oh, you don't judge? You poured all kinds of judgment and derision on people who don't think the way you do, who don't believe that fighting is the only way. You were totally scornful of the <<lesser men and women>> who didn't survive what you did. You have judged them as lesser and blamed them for what happened to them. I think I see the psychology of your childhood home -- you were hurt and blamed for it. >and since you have judged me, I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights you've been in. >it is now time for me to judge > you. > > You Fail > D- Whatever. > > Lg -- nimue Perspective and proportion are the first casualties of hysteria. Steven A. Shaw Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:46 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: >Lawrence Glickman wrote: >> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 10:22:39 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> I am real. Why don't you come work in a Title 1 school in Brooklyn, >>> tough guy? >>>> >>>> Lg >> >> You have a lot of chutzpah criticizing me for doing what I did to STAY >> ALIVE. > >I am not criticizing you for doing what you had to to stay alive. I am >criticizing you for acting as if that is the ONLY way to survive such >circumstances. How arrogant of you -- your way is the only way? It's not. >I also think the way you brag about all the fights you have had is pathetic. >Don't you have anything else to be proud of, anything else that shows you >are a real man? As I said, if you are always getting into fights, you are >doing something wrong. > >>This just shows how ignorant you are. Judge not lest you be >> judged, > >Oh, you don't judge? You poured all kinds of judgment and derision on >people who don't think the way you do, who don't believe that fighting is >the only way. You were totally scornful of the <<lesser men and women>> who >didn't survive what you did. You have judged them as lesser and blamed them >for what happened to them. I think I see the psychology of your childhood >home -- you were hurt and blamed for it. > >>and since you have judged me, > >I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights you've >been in. > >>it is now time for me to judge >> you. >> >> You Fail >> D- > >Whatever. >> >> Lg Read the title of this thread. What does it say? I'll help you out: Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:46 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: > >I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights you've >been in. Read the title of this thread. What is this thread about here, I'll assist you since you seem to have lost your way: What Kind of Sheep Allow Themselves to be Massacred Without Resisting? In the context of this thread, nothing I have said is inappropriate to the thread. I've not mentioned all the times I have _avoided_ altercations, but the ones that came to me, that I couldn't avoid, I prevailed at, by RESISTING. And you castigate me for that. There is something wrong with you. There is something wrong with your thought processes. What happened to me was I happened to be a goldfish thrown into a tank of hungry sharks. You blaspheme me for what I did to survive in that environment. You know nothing about my history, my environment, yet you blaspheme me for doing what I had to do to survive. I RESISTED BECOMING A VICTIM. THAT'S MY BRAG! It seems you would have preferred had I died at the hands of a psycho. Sorry to disappoint you...that will never happen if I can help it. You go ahead and bend over and take it up the ass. Tell me how it feels when it is all over, if you're still alive. Lg Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:46 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: > >I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights you've >been in. Read the title of this thread. What is this thread about here, I'll assist you since you seem to have lost your way: What Kind of Sheep Allow Themselves to be Massacred Without Resisting? In the context of this thread, nothing I have said is inappropriate to the thread. I've not mentioned all the times I have _avoided_ altercations, but the ones that came to me, that I couldn't avoid, I prevailed at, by RESISTING. And you castigate me for that. There is something wrong with you. There is something wrong with your thought processes. What happened to me was I happened to be a goldfish thrown into a tank of hungry sharks. You blaspheme me for what I did to survive in that environment. You know nothing about my history, my environment, yet you blaspheme me for doing what I had to do to survive. I RESISTED BECOMING A VICTIM. THAT'S MY BRAG! It seems you would have preferred had I died at the hands of a psycho. Sorry to disappoint you...that will never happen if I can help it. You go ahead and bend over and take it up the ass. Tell me how it feels when it is all over, if you're still alive. Lg AND I WANT TO ADD: You are a perfect example of what is WRONG with our public school systems. Why our children have become wimps and girly boys. YOU HAVE EMASCULATED THEM, just as you try to emasculate me. Not gonna happen. I'll post a photo of my GONADS on a binary group shortly just to prove to you I HAVE A PAIR. Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:46 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: > >I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights you've >been in. Read the title of this thread. What is this thread about here, I'll assist you since you seem to have lost your way: What Kind of Sheep Allow Themselves to be Massacred Without Resisting? In the context of this thread, nothing I have said is inappropriate to the thread. I've not mentioned all the times I have _avoided_ altercations, but the ones that came to me, that I couldn't avoid, I prevailed at, by RESISTING. And you castigate me for that. There is something wrong with you. There is something wrong with your thought processes. What happened to me was I happened to be a goldfish thrown into a tank of hungry sharks. You blaspheme me for what I did to survive in that environment. You know nothing about my history, my environment, yet you blaspheme me for doing what I had to do to survive. I RESISTED BECOMING A VICTIM. THAT'S MY BRAG! It seems you would have preferred had I died at the hands of a psycho. Sorry to disappoint you...that will never happen if I can help it. You go ahead and bend over and take it up the ass. Tell me how it feels when it is all over, if you're still alive. Lg AND I WANT TO ADD: You are a perfect example of what is WRONG with our public school systems. Why our children have become wimps and girly boys. YOU HAVE EMASCULATED THEM, just as you try to emasculate me. Not gonna happen. I'll post a photo of my GONADS on a binary group shortly just to prove to you I HAVE A PAIR. ================================================================= Here you are: go to alt.binaries.pictures.tools and open "I GOT A PAIR" here you will see, I still have my gonads, NO THANKS TO THE LIKES OF YOU! Quote
Guest nimue Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 Lawrence Glickman wrote: > On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 17:49:46 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> > wrote: > >> >> I do think it is completely immature to boast about all the fights >> you've been in. > > Read the title of this thread. What is this thread about > here, I'll assist you since you seem to have lost your way: > > What Kind of Sheep Allow Themselves to be Massacred Without Resisting? > > In the context of this thread, nothing I have said is inappropriate to > the thread. I didn't say it was inappropriate. I just think it's ridiculous to boast about being in fights. You write like SUCH a tough guy. It's really immature. > I've not mentioned all the times I have _avoided_ > altercations, but the ones that came to me, that I couldn't avoid, I > prevailed at, by RESISTING. > > And you castigate me for that. No. I think you speak about your many fights with great pride and I think that is a sad thing for an adult to do. > > There is something wrong with you. There is something wrong with your > thought processes. What happened to me was I happened to be a > goldfish thrown into a tank of hungry sharks. Believe me when I say I am sorry that happened to you. I am sorry you were born in a dysfunctional home and that you suffered terribly. > You blaspheme me for > what I did to survive in that environment. No, I don't. I just think it's ridiculous to brag about your many fights. I mean, you wrote <<I have looked down the wrong end of a gun barrel more times than you have jacked off.>> Now, since most men I know jack off at least once a day, I would have to assume you've looked down the barrel of a gun many, many times. If that is true, you were doing something wrong unless you were a helpless little kid who had a gun stuck in his face every day. I think you said that to show how tough you were and I am tired of that kind of talk. I hear it all the time. >You know nothing about my > history, my environment, yet you blaspheme me for doing what I had to > do to survive. > > I RESISTED BECOMING A VICTIM. Sorry, but I believe that if you are in fights all the time, you are doing something wrong. I don't mean if you have defend yourself from an abusive parent -- that doesn't count. But if you fight with friends and aquaintances and strangers frequently, dude, you are doing something wrong. Most people don't have to do that. > > THAT'S MY BRAG! I don't know your story so I can't really judge. To me it sounds like even when you were past the age of being abused, you still continued to fight and to put yourself in situations where you would have to fight. You don't want to take responsibility for that. > > It seems you would have preferred had I died at the hands of a psycho. Hell, no. > Sorry to disappoint you...that will never happen if I can help it. > You go ahead and bend over and take it up the ass. Tell me how it > feels when it is all over, if you're still alive. > You seem to think that the only choice in life is to fuck someone or get fucked, to use your imagery. That isn't the only choice. > Lg -- nimue Perspective and proportion are the first casualties of hysteria. Steven A. Shaw Quote
Guest nimue Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 Lawrence Glickman wrote: snip > > AND I WANT TO ADD: > You are a perfect example of what is WRONG with our public school > systems. Why our children have become wimps and girly boys. YOU HAVE > EMASCULATED THEM, just as you try to emasculate me. > > Not gonna happen. I'll post a photo of my GONADS on a binary group > shortly just to prove to you I HAVE A PAIR. > > ================================================================= > > Here you are: > > go to alt.binaries.pictures.tools > > and open "I GOT A PAIR" > > here you will see, I still have my gonads, NO THANKS TO THE LIKES OF > YOU! Whatever. I wonder what is wrong with me, arguing with someone like you. -- nimue Perspective and proportion are the first casualties of hysteria. Steven A. Shaw Quote
Guest Lawrence Glickman Posted April 22, 2007 Posted April 22, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 19:20:25 -0400, "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote: >Lawrence Glickman wrote: > >snip >> >> AND I WANT TO ADD: >> You are a perfect example of what is WRONG with our public school >> systems. Why our children have become wimps and girly boys. YOU HAVE >> EMASCULATED THEM, just as you try to emasculate me. > > >> >> Not gonna happen. I'll post a photo of my GONADS on a binary group >> shortly just to prove to you I HAVE A PAIR. >> >> ================================================================= >> >> Here you are: >> >> go to alt.binaries.pictures.tools >> >> and open "I GOT A PAIR" >> >> here you will see, I still have my gonads, NO THANKS TO THE LIKES OF >> YOU! > >Whatever. I wonder what is wrong with me, arguing with someone like you. You can't beat my LOGIC and it is driving you insane. No, I take that back. You were insane before you got here. It is okay. That's what newsgroups are for. Go to ANY newsgroup, looking for harmony. Tell me if you find any that aren't a clique of just a couple/few people, to the exclusion of everyone else. Lg Quote
Guest Gunner Posted April 23, 2007 Posted April 23, 2007 On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:07:33 -0600, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: >Gunner wrote: >> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 22:56:43 -0600, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> >> wrote: >> >>> 0:-] wrote: >>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:35:28 -0600, Notan >>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Lawrence Glickman wrote: >>>>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:36:57 -0600, Notan >>>>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> 0:-] wrote: >>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:06:30 -0600, Notan >>>>>>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> 0:-] wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:59:04 -0600, Notan >>>>>>>>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Omnipotent wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Notan wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> Omnipotent wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Your right, if all the people in the room would have charged the nut >>>>>>>>>>>>>> he wouldn't have reloaded the first time. >>>>>>>>>>>>> What was the distance between Cho and those in the classroom? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> If it was anything more than 10-15 feet, with practice (and I'm sure >>>>>>>>>>>>> he did) >>>>>>>>>>>>> he'd have no problem loading a new magazine. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Also remember that those in the classroom weren't ready for the events >>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>> followed... He was. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> They should have charged him while he was shooting. Somebody would have >>>>>>>>>>>> tackled him before he needed to reload. If young people can't cover 15 >>>>>>>>>>>> to 20 feet in a few seconds they are in serious need of physical >>>>>>>>>>>> conditioning. >>>>>>>>>>> Easy to say, after the fact, from behind the security of a computer. >>>>>>>>>> Nope. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> http://www.cnn.com/US/9806/16/kinkel.arraign.update/ >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> And Kip was stopped, in the middle of his shooting people in the >>>>>>>>>> Thurston HS gym, by a group of boys that tackled him. One at least was >>>>>>>>>> shot even before he nailed Kip. He fought anyway. >>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Try the real world, for a change, "Notan." >>>>>>>>> And unless the circumstances/scenarios/etc. were exactly the same, >>>>>>>>> there's no way to say what worked in one would work in the other. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Try the real world, for a change, "Kane." >>>>>>>> I do. I have. I will. Trust me on this. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> R R R R R ... you just insisted that I cannot, since no two scenarios >>>>>>>> are exact. Of course they aren't. That does not stop me. Does it you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Why would you claim that one can't make good predictions based on >>>>>>>> approximations? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> These things are studied and certain outcomes ARE predictable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> One such was made by the FBI: Those intended victims that fight back >>>>>>>> increase their odds of survival and those that fight back ARMED >>>>>>>> increase their chances even more. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You wouldn't really want to claim that there are not various scenarios >>>>>>>> where fighting back could save lives, each different than the prior >>>>>>>> ones, now would you? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Did you read the link I posted a number of times today on violent or >>>>>>>> potentially violent confrontations where fighting back won the day? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Or do you need, to survive emotionally, the idea that it's hopeless to >>>>>>>> fight back and cowering in approaching death is more sensible? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> All different unduplicate scenarios that resulting in wins for the >>>>>>>> armed intended victims, or someone that came to their rescue armed. >>>>>>> I'm not saying that, in general, attempting to stop an attacker isn't >>>>>>> better than just sitting back, but there are circumstances where it's >>>>>>> not. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> You said, "They should have charged him while he was shooting. Somebody >>>>>>> would have tackled him before he needed to reload..." >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Without knowing the layout of the room, the training, if any, the people >>>>>>> had in self-defense, <again> how close Cho was to the people, and a >>>>>>> multitude of other variables, there's no way to know what a "stand" would >>>>>>> have resulted in. It's possible they did try to rush him. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But your answer is an absolute. If they did this, this is what the >>>>>>> outcome would have been. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Unless you know something that no one else seems to know, it's nothing >>>>>>> but speculation. >>>>>> News Bulletin for Notan: >>>>>> >>>>>> Every object in a room is a potential weapon. How hard would it have >>>>>> been to throw tables and chairs at the perp? 30 people with a room >>>>>> full of very hard material objects, some of which must have been in >>>>>> and on their desks. All throwing shit at the perp at the same time >>>>>> whilst rushing him with some table in front of you to slow down the >>>>>> ammo. >>>>>> >>>>>> PEOPLE NEED TO BE TRAINED TO REACT AGRESSIVELY WHEN ATTACKED. >>>>>> SUBMISSION EQUALS DEATH. >>>>>> >>>>>> It is kill or be killed. Remember that Notan. You kill them, or they >>>>>> WILL kill you. There is no choice in such a situation. Kill them or >>>>>> die. >>>>> Was it a classroom with tables and chairs? Or was it a lecture hall, >>>>> where everything is bolted down? >>>> Doesn't matter. My college texts would have been horrific weapons had >>>> I chosen to use them for that purpose. >>>> >>>> Have you seen any skinny light college texts? >>>> >>>> Most people carry hard electronics with them these days. >>>> >>>> Book bags loaded down with whatever. >>>> >>>> I've never seen a room, not even in a monastery, that did not have >>>> something in it that could be a weapon if one was determined to fight. >>>> >>>> People will flinch even if you throw a pillow at them. There's your >>>> chance. >>> With all these "should haves," the question remains, why did they all die? >> >> >> Because they let themselves be killed. >> >> Unfortunately. Doesnt speak well for the culture they came from, or >> their parents lack of training them to "adapt, improvise, overcome" > >It's unfortunate that this is what society has come down to... The idea >that, as a teenager , you have to be ready to fight for your life. > >Times have certainly changed. Son..humans have ALWAYs had to be ready to fight for your life. Be it a vicious dog, a piece of farm equipment, bad weather, or evil people...the list is long. Whats bad is todays kids have little exposure to such threats...and are ill prepared when one comes along. Its the result of being indoctrinated in the agenda of the Nanny State. Where the Government or its agents will take care of you... And see how well THAT worked in VT. Gunner "I don't want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub. -- Grover Norquist Quote
Guest Kane Posted April 23, 2007 Posted April 23, 2007 On Apr 21, 9:56 pm, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > 0:-] wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 20:35:28 -0600, Notan > > <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > > >> Lawrence Glickman wrote: > >>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 19:36:57 -0600, Notan > >>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > > >>>> 0:-] wrote: > >>>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 16:06:30 -0600, Notan > >>>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > > >>>>>> 0:-] wrote: > >>>>>>> On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 13:59:04 -0600, Notan > >>>>>>> <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> Omnipotent wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Notan wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Omnipotent wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>> <snip> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Your right, if all the people in the room would have charged the nut > >>>>>>>>>>> he wouldn't have reloaded the first time. > >>>>>>>>>> What was the distance between Cho and those in the classroom? > > >>>>>>>>>> If it was anything more than 10-15 feet, with practice (and I'm sure > >>>>>>>>>> he did) > >>>>>>>>>> he'd have no problem loading a new magazine. > > >>>>>>>>>> Also remember that those in the classroom weren't ready for the events > >>>>>>>>>> that > >>>>>>>>>> followed... He was. > > >>>>>>>>> They should have charged him while he was shooting. Somebody would have > >>>>>>>>> tackled him before he needed to reload. If young people can't cover 15 > >>>>>>>>> to 20 feet in a few seconds they are in serious need of physical > >>>>>>>>> conditioning. > >>>>>>>> Easy to say, after the fact, from behind the security of a computer. > >>>>>>> Nope. > > >>>>>>>http://www.cnn.com/US/9806/16/kinkel.arraign.update/ > > >>>>>>> And Kip was stopped, in the middle of his shooting people in the > >>>>>>> Thurston HS gym, by a group of boys that tackled him. One at least was > >>>>>>> shot even before he nailed Kip. He fought anyway. > >>>>>> <snip> > > >>>>>>> Try the real world, for a change, "Notan." > >>>>>> And unless the circumstances/scenarios/etc. were exactly the same, > >>>>>> there's no way to say what worked in one would work in the other. > > >>>>>> Try the real world, for a change, "Kane." > >>>>> I do. I have. I will. Trust me on this. > > >>>>> R R R R R ... you just insisted that I cannot, since no two scenarios > >>>>> are exact. Of course they aren't. That does not stop me. Does it you? > > >>>>> Why would you claim that one can't make good predictions based on > >>>>> approximations? > > >>>>> These things are studied and certain outcomes ARE predictable. > > >>>>> One such was made by the FBI: Those intended victims that fight back > >>>>> increase their odds of survival and those that fight back ARMED > >>>>> increase their chances even more. > > >>>>> You wouldn't really want to claim that there are not various scenarios > >>>>> where fighting back could save lives, each different than the prior > >>>>> ones, now would you? > > >>>>> Did you read the link I posted a number of times today on violent or > >>>>> potentially violent confrontations where fighting back won the day? > > >>>>> Or do you need, to survive emotionally, the idea that it's hopeless to > >>>>> fight back and cowering in approaching death is more sensible? > > >>>>>http://www.claytoncramer.com/gundefenseblog/blogger.html > > >>>>> All different unduplicate scenarios that resulting in wins for the > >>>>> armed intended victims, or someone that came to their rescue armed. > >>>> I'm not saying that, in general, attempting to stop an attacker isn't > >>>> better than just sitting back, but there are circumstances where it's > >>>> not. > > >>>> You said, "They should have charged him while he was shooting. Somebody > >>>> would have tackled him before he needed to reload..." > > >>>> Without knowing the layout of the room, the training, if any, the people > >>>> had in self-defense, <again> how close Cho was to the people, and a > >>>> multitude of other variables, there's no way to know what a "stand" would > >>>> have resulted in. It's possible they did try to rush him. > > >>>> But your answer is an absolute. If they did this, this is what the > >>>> outcome would have been. > > >>>> Unless you know something that no one else seems to know, it's nothing > >>>> but speculation. > >>> News Bulletin for Notan: > > >>> Every object in a room is a potential weapon. How hard would it have > >>> been to throw tables and chairs at the perp? 30 people with a room > >>> full of very hard material objects, some of which must have been in > >>> and on their desks. All throwing shit at the perp at the same time > >>> whilst rushing him with some table in front of you to slow down the > >>> ammo. > > >>> PEOPLE NEED TO BE TRAINED TO REACT AGRESSIVELY WHEN ATTACKED. > >>> SUBMISSION EQUALS DEATH. > > >>> It is kill or be killed. Remember that Notan. You kill them, or they > >>> WILL kill you. There is no choice in such a situation. Kill them or > >>> die. > >> Was it a classroom with tables and chairs? Or was it a lecture hall, > >> where everything is bolted down? > > > Doesn't matter. My college texts would have been horrific weapons had > > I chosen to use them for that purpose. > > > Have you seen any skinny light college texts? > > > Most people carry hard electronics with them these days. > > > Book bags loaded down with whatever. > > > I've never seen a room, not even in a monastery, that did not have > > something in it that could be a weapon if one was determined to fight. > > > People will flinch even if you throw a pillow at them. There's your > > chance. > > With all these "should haves," the question remains, why did they all die? You regard all the citations of DID fight back as akin to "should haves?" The answer to your question is simple. They did NOT have to die. Not all of them. All the data we have, and I've told you and cited the FBI information, as have others here, tells us that fighting back with anything or nothing at all gives you at the least a greater chance of survival. The real answer, of course, is that had even ONE person in the building that Cho confronted and shot or shot at, had been able to fire back he'd not have succeeded. Again and again where people have shot back, or sometimes simply brandished a gun, the perp has backed or, or been shot, sometimes killed. Why are YOU avoiding those facts, and trying to change the subject to "should haves?" Your question does not prove that being without a gun in those circumstances, Cho shooting, would have reduced the deaths by "some" means that YOU have not named. What would YOU do with a gunman in the room firing at innocent victims? Would you NOT prefer to be armed yourself for some chance of survival? Kane > > -- > Notan Quote
Guest Kane Posted April 23, 2007 Posted April 23, 2007 On Apr 22, 10:07 am, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > Gunner wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Apr 2007 22:56:43 -0600, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> > > wrote: ....snipping my portion of the prior posts... > >> With all these "should haves," the question remains, why did they all die? > > > Because they let themselves be killed. > > > Unfortunately. Doesnt speak well for the culture they came from, or > > their parents lack of training them to "adapt, improvise, overcome" > > It's unfortunate that this is what society has come down to... The idea > that, as a teenager , you have to be ready to fight for your life. Come to? Somewhere in the world since we came to be we have had to fight to survive. Or we would not be here. I doubt a day of total peace and freedom from danger has ever occured in any full planetary rotation of Earth. > > Times have certainly changed. What has changed is the media access. What we were often ignorant of because of distance and technology limits we now KNOW -- almost instantly. The shooting at VT was being discussed BEFORE THE second round of slaughter ... by people text messaging. Before we could remain in blissful ignorance and be happy and certain there was no danger. Yet, if you read the media of the times, even 200-300 years ago, there was most certainly danger, and at all times between. Do you know when the first mass murder in a school setting took place in the US? I'll let you look it up. Most here know it by heart. And a gun wasn't the means. But it was highly effective in terms of death count. > -- > Notan Get out of your cocoon, butterfly. Kane Quote
Guest Kane Posted April 23, 2007 Posted April 23, 2007 On Apr 21, 5:59 pm, "-HoSt-" <h...@universe.com> wrote: > You do not know if nobody tried to fight back. > Maybe some did. > ....snip.... Some did. The professor that blocked the door with his body and died for it. Helping a few students escape given the time to get out the windows. In one room the killer had left but was believed to be returning that stodents blocked the door with furniture. He fired through the door nd the furniture. One woman was shot in the finger as a result, but they held the door. The issure here goes to the pitiful attempt to try and fight back without proper tools...a gun, or guns. Just as at Thurston High, had someone had a gun, Kip Kinkel might well have killed no one nor wounded anyone. One school staffer (as has been proven in school shootings before) or even a visitor with a gun, (also proven) can stop such efforts even before they get started. Or in midstride before more die. It's absolutely sad how some are in denial about this simple fact. The vast majority of legally armed citizens, carrying for defense, do not misuse their gun. You should read the stats. Percentages of CCW holders so small as to be statistically insignificant have violated gun laws...in fact, often nothing more than being caught carrying where they weren't supposed to...and they still didn't shoot anyone. 0:] This emotion driven rant against gun owners costs lives, just as it did at VT. Kane Quote
Guest Notan Posted April 23, 2007 Posted April 23, 2007 Kane wrote: <snip> > > You regard all the citations of DID fight back as akin to "should > haves?" > > The answer to your question is simple. They did NOT have to die. Not > all of them. > > All the data we have, and I've told you and cited the FBI information, > as have others here, tells us that fighting back with anything or > nothing at all gives you at the least a greater chance of survival. > > The real answer, of course, is that had even ONE person in the > building that Cho confronted and shot or shot at, had been able to > fire back he'd not have succeeded. > > Again and again where people have shot back, or sometimes simply > brandished a gun, the perp has backed or, or been shot, sometimes > killed. > > Why are YOU avoiding those facts, and trying to change the subject to > "should haves?" > > Your question does not prove that being without a gun in those > circumstances, Cho shooting, would have reduced the deaths by "some" > means that YOU have not named. > > What would YOU do with a gunman in the room firing at innocent > victims? > > Would you NOT prefer to be armed yourself for some chance of survival? I said they weren't prepared, and I'm not sure anything they were ready to do would have saved them. Where's the argument? By the way, I carry. -- Notan Quote
Guest Bama Brian Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Kane wrote: > On Apr 21, 5:59 pm, "-HoSt-" <h...@universe.com> wrote: >> You do not know if nobody tried to fight back. >> Maybe some did. >> > ...snip.... > > Some did. The professor that blocked the door with his body and died > for it. Helping a few students escape given the time to get out the > windows. Barring the door is a good self-defense. But it's not fighting back. When Cho was in a room shooting, it apparently went down like this: bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang Cho pauses to reload (repeat 17 bangs and pause to reload n times) Now if someone had thrown a book at Cho, and charged him during one of those pauses to reload, they all might have had a chance. But even with some doors barred, there were still 32 murders. > > In one room the killer had left but was believed to be returning that > stodents blocked the door with furniture. He fired through the door nd > the furniture. One woman was shot in the finger as a result, but they > held the door. > > The issure here goes to the pitiful attempt to try and fight back > without proper tools...a gun, or guns. > > Just as at Thurston High, had someone had a gun, Kip Kinkel might well > have killed no one nor wounded anyone. > > One school staffer (as has been proven in school shootings before) or > even a visitor with a gun, (also proven) can stop such efforts even > before they get started. Or in midstride before more die. > > It's absolutely sad how some are in denial about this simple fact. > > The vast majority of legally armed citizens, carrying for defense, do > not misuse their gun. You should read the stats. Percentages of CCW > holders so small as to be statistically insignificant have violated > gun laws...in fact, often nothing more than being caught carrying > where they weren't supposed to...and they still didn't shoot anyone. > 0:] > > This emotion driven rant against gun owners costs lives, just as it > did at VT. > > Kane > > Quote
Guest Notan Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Bama Brian wrote: > Kane wrote: >> On Apr 21, 5:59 pm, "-HoSt-" <h...@universe.com> wrote: >>> You do not know if nobody tried to fight back. >>> Maybe some did. >>> >> ...snip.... >> >> Some did. The professor that blocked the door with his body and died >> for it. Helping a few students escape given the time to get out the >> windows. > > Barring the door is a good self-defense. But it's not fighting back. > > When Cho was in a room shooting, it apparently went down like this: > > bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang > bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang > > Cho pauses to reload > > (repeat 17 bangs and pause to reload n times) > > Now if someone had thrown a book at Cho, and charged him during one of > those pauses to reload, they all might have had a chance. Pure speculation. I suspect that when the gunfire started, everyone dove for cover. For the few seconds while Cho was reloading, I doubt anyone poked their head up to see what was going on. Then, another 17 rounds... -- Notan Quote
Guest Bama Brian Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Notan wrote: > Bama Brian wrote: >> Kane wrote: >>> On Apr 21, 5:59 pm, "-HoSt-" <h...@universe.com> wrote: >>>> You do not know if nobody tried to fight back. >>>> Maybe some did. >>>> >>> ...snip.... >>> >>> Some did. The professor that blocked the door with his body and died >>> for it. Helping a few students escape given the time to get out the >>> windows. >> >> Barring the door is a good self-defense. But it's not fighting back. >> >> When Cho was in a room shooting, it apparently went down like this: >> >> bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang >> bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang >> >> Cho pauses to reload >> >> (repeat 17 bangs and pause to reload n times) >> >> Now if someone had thrown a book at Cho, and charged him during one of >> those pauses to reload, they all might have had a chance. > > Pure speculation. > > I suspect that when the gunfire started, everyone dove for cover. For > the few > seconds while Cho was reloading, I doubt anyone poked their head up to see > what was going on. Then, another 17 rounds... Title of the thread: "What Kind of Sheep All Themselves to be Massacred Without Resisting?" You made the point of the thread, Notan. > Quote
Guest Kane Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 On Apr 23, 12:40 pm, Notan <notan@ddressthatcanbespammed> wrote: > Kane wrote: > > <snip> > > > > > > > You regard all the citations of DID fight back as akin to "should > > haves?" > > > The answer to your question is simple. They did NOT have to die. Not > > all of them. > > > All the data we have, and I've told you and cited the FBI information, > > as have others here, tells us that fighting back with anything or > > nothing at all gives you at the least a greater chance of survival. > > > The real answer, of course, is that had even ONE person in the > > building that Cho confronted and shot or shot at, had been able to > > fire back he'd not have succeeded. > > > Again and again where people have shot back, or sometimes simply > > brandished a gun, the perp has backed or, or been shot, sometimes > > killed. > > > Why are YOU avoiding those facts, and trying to change the subject to > > "should haves?" > > > Your question does not prove that being without a gun in those > > circumstances, Cho shooting, would have reduced the deaths by "some" > > means that YOU have not named. > > > What would YOU do with a gunman in the room firing at innocent > > victims? > > > Would you NOT prefer to be armed yourself for some chance of survival? > > I said they weren't prepared, Sure they were. Some were prepared to die, some to live. They acted accordingly. > and I'm not sure anything they were ready > to do would have saved them. Then how did they manage, by the self sacrifice of one, and the energetic efforts of others, to thwart the shooter long enough for some to get away? Your logic astounds me. > > Where's the argument? > Above. That someone is or isn't "prepared," what ever you mean by "prepared," has NO standing in an argument where people acted to survive, and others didn't. > By the way, I carry. Your dick? > > -- > Notan I've seen you post a few things that because of my own professional background I believe exposes you as a liar. Since I don't particularly care, other than to note that you make illogical claims, and then appear willing to do anything possible -- sans facts-- to defend the claims, I find this one very hard to believe. Was it not you I asked if you would rather have had a gun in that classroom when Cho entered than what the students and staff were equiped with? Table and chairs and book cases and a professors personal sacrifice of his life? Or a gun? If not you that I asked, then I'll add you to the list of non- answerers -- so far -- that I've asked it of, with a one day limit. And I await your answer. Which would you prefer for yourself, armed or unarmed with a gun in that situation. If you chose "not armed," I'm curious how you'd defend your wish. In fact, I challenge all readers to answer. Which would YOU, dear reader, prefer to have...just your body and the furniture, and others bodies, or a gun? Come on, be brave. Answer up. Quote
Guest Notan Posted April 24, 2007 Posted April 24, 2007 Kane wrote: <snip> > Come on, be brave. Answer up. To what? Your nonsense? No, thanks. -- Notan Quote
Guest gatt Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 "nimue" <cup_o_cakes@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:462b7028$0$4906$4c368faf@roadrunner.com... >> Blessed be his name. Amen. > > Although we are disagreeing on other things, I have to say we are in > perfect > agreement on this. I am just going to write the professor's name here so > we > don't forget it. His name was Liviu Librescu and he showed us all what > true > heroism is. Thank you for acknowledging him. Well said, all. -c Quote
Guest robw Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 So you think the students were sheep? "Bama Brian" <bamaNOTbrian@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:5btXh.3512$Ut6.1238@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... > Notan wrote: > > Bama Brian wrote: > >> Kane wrote: > >>> On Apr 21, 5:59 pm, "-HoSt-" <h...@universe.com> wrote: > >>>> You do not know if nobody tried to fight back. > >>>> Maybe some did. > >>>> > >>> ...snip.... > >>> > >>> Some did. The professor that blocked the door with his body and died > >>> for it. Helping a few students escape given the time to get out the > >>> windows. > >> > >> Barring the door is a good self-defense. But it's not fighting back. > >> > >> When Cho was in a room shooting, it apparently went down like this: > >> > >> bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang > >> bang bang bang bang bang bang bang bang > >> > >> Cho pauses to reload > >> > >> (repeat 17 bangs and pause to reload n times) > >> > >> Now if someone had thrown a book at Cho, and charged him during one of > >> those pauses to reload, they all might have had a chance. > > > > Pure speculation. > > > > I suspect that when the gunfire started, everyone dove for cover. For > > the few > > seconds while Cho was reloading, I doubt anyone poked their head up to see > > what was going on. Then, another 17 rounds... > > Title of the thread: "What Kind of Sheep All Themselves to be Massacred > Without Resisting?" > > You made the point of the thread, Notan. > > Quote
Guest Bama Brian Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 robw wrote: > So you think the students were sheep? In a word, yes. AFAIK, not one tried to throw a textbook at Cho. Not one tried to tackle him during the reloading phases. Quote
Guest robw Posted April 25, 2007 Posted April 25, 2007 Where you there? "Bama Brian" <bamaNOTbrian@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:JULXh.3714$Ut6.2770@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net... > robw wrote: > > So you think the students were sheep? > > In a word, yes. > > AFAIK, not one tried to throw a textbook at Cho. Not one tried to > tackle him during the reloading phases. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.