dungeonbaby

This sounds really counter intuitive. How many kids back in the 60's were involved in mass shootings? How many Columbines, Virginia Techs, etc. occured in the 60's?

 

Are Randolph Roth's statements that the US homicide rate is about "as low a place as [they've] been in the past 100 years" supposed to be taken as gospel truth? I'm pretty certain that there are other people out there who will cite the opposite and base their conclusions on statistics like Mr. Roth cited.

 

A unbiased statement by the US Federal Bureau of Investigation about the state of crime today compared to yesteryears would, in my opinion, carry more weight insofar as credibility is concerned.

then cite reports that will support your opinions and beliefs. start with the FBI's Uniform Crime Report which has statistics from the 1930s and see what you come up with. here's what i know: in 2011 there were 4.8 homicides per 100,000 people in america. in 1980 it was 10.2. a huge decrease.

it is also counter-intuitive that we are going around the sun instead of the sun going around our planet, but the truth was counter-intuitive to what people held to be real for centuries. counter-intuitive is not equal to wrong. additionally, if you had read the article i cited, you would've been able to answer your own concerns about the statistics. that mass murders, according to another history professor, involve a totally different kind of perpetrator and therefore speak of a different social problem altogether.

yes, i just rendered all my stats ineffectual. to move the discussion forward.

how do school shootings tie in with the thread topic?

On the first article: Interesting. But flawed.

 

When you see America as nothing but an arrogant brat and assume, therefore, that it operates on the misguided belief that it is its birthright to rule the world instead of on a Judeo-Christian impetus to do what is right, then you can only imagine certain responses coming from their people. You can only imagine that they would act in a self-centered, short-sighted way. The scenarios you quoted paint the US as having such little imagination and being so intent on hegemony that they would build the hammer (or buy one from China) to nail their own coffin.

 

Americans are sitting on vast reserves of energy and could stop dependence on their enemies' oil if they wanted ignored al gore or felt sufficiently threatened. Just in Pennsylvania the oil hasn't been touched in 80 years, I heard. And they can always do what the Germans did in WWII – convert coal to gasoline. They could do that tomorrow. So the oil shock scenario…kaput.

 

Besides, China doesn't want the dollar to devalue. They need to prop up the US or else their investment is gone. What good is their loan to the US if the US pays them back with cheap dollars? And who will buy all the stuff they manufacture for Walmart?

 

True, but American Exceptionalism and the view that America should be the world's policeman makes the military misadventure more likely than the others. The unpopular war in Iraq is an example.

 

Although, I do not think that it would cause the end of American domination. A more like scenario would be social implosion. Things in the US are now tense with the economic downturn, massive illegal immigration from Mexico, and a taxation system favoring socialist ideology. I think it would be more like the middle class being taxed out of existence, collapse of social security due to lots of massive unemployment and the job market bottoming out because the illegals from Mexico pouring in on the American Southwest (check out California as a harbinger for all 3 scenarios).

seems like Ryuji hit the bull's-eye on this one.

As to mass shootings which seem to be increasing at an alarming rate, your points are indeed valid. But what's causing this deterioration of moral values? Why the increase in mental illness and/or the failure to properly diagnose and treat the illness? Seems most of the shootings that occur are commited by young people. The causes could be any of those you mentioned or a combination thereof.

 

This phenomenon was practically unheard off in the 60', 70's and even the 80's. As far as I know mass shootings as we know them today started with the Columbine massacre. Sure there could have been similar shootings in the past but none gained more notoriety that the one at Columbine.

mass shootings did not begin with Columbine. and the 60s were not immune from this phenomenon. notoriety might be relative to who's doing the talking.

the fact is there is less violent crime in the states today than there was in the 80s or even during the Great Depression. according to "American Homicide" author Randolph Roth, professor of history at Ohio State, the US homicide rate is about "as low a place as [they've] been in the past 100 years."

You got a fast car

I need a ticket to anywhere

Maybe we can make a deal

Maybe together we can get somewhere

I'd always hoped for better thought

Maybe together you and me can find it

Matisyahu Fast Car/No Woman No Cry acoustic version. What a pre-dawn escape should sound like.

Was reading an article on yahoo this evening. There was this 7 year old kid who was placed in handcuffs and interrogated for 10 hours by New York's finest over the issue of $5 milk money. Since when do police treat 7 year old children like hardened criminals? Here's the link to that story:

 

http://gma.yahoo.com...topstories.html

 

Hopefully the link will still be around by the time you read this post.

 

Anyway, I think there is something fundamentally wrong in a society where police treat 7 year old kids like hardened criminals. Between the increasing incidence of mass shootings and the ridiculous manner in which children are treated by the police, what is happening to America?

in the same article you posted a link to, the family of the 7 yr old boy is suing for $250 million. $250 million. that seem a little greedy to you? that number alone should give one pause and consider that maybe, just maybe there is another side to the story. was it really just about lunch money or could there have been another story that involved a disturbing pattern of bullying and threats? could the charges have been exaggerated?

.

anyway, mass shootings are a different matter. i think this has more to do with a deterioration of traditional values, the decreased central role of family, and a lack of focus on proper diagnosis of and response to mental illness.

A Clash of Kings in time for a pause as the 3rd season of Game of Thrones comes on.

re-read Dreamsnake by Vonda McIntyre, another Nebula Award-winning sci fi author.

Apparently Dorner and LL Cool J are twins.

now i know i wasn't the only one who thought this.

well, sex any time of the day is simply fantastic, isn't it? morning sounds pretty heavenly, especially if it's bright out. all the better to see with.

for you, what percentage of sex is physical pleasure and what percentage is mental/emotional?

on top of the usual rush hour traffic jams? yes, at least around certain "hotspots"

will dinner tonight come with wine?

kuya germs. just because he'd be the underdog.

how mean is your punch?

do you prefer using disposable cups or the house mug or do you bring your own?

 

hmmm. does that mean you usually skip on the whipped cream when you order frapps or iced coffee? and do you go for full cream or fat-free milk?

hot chocolate, no whip, nonfat milk, house mug when it's offered. i know. paired with dessert, it's a little silly to hold the whipped cream but whatever.

para hindi naman mag-degenerate yung thread to the point na puro coffee orders lang, i'd like to add a general question.

 

what's your favorite usual coffee match?

you part of the throng enthralled by nicotine?

 

masaya ka na ba sa kape at kwento lang?

do you like hitting the sweet pastries when you drink coffee?

coffee and good conversation is usually enough. if the conversation is on the long side though, i will start ordering ensaymada and/or cakes. and start thinking of hitting the gym.

yes, i'm sleeping in.

cocol = coffee coffee lang = innocent fun, no hanky panky

momol = make out make out lang = no commitments

not proud of the fact that i understood those terms.

what is wrong with the world today?

mtf, for keeping the world safer...

and all the other men in uniform who serve honorably.

@007: is verbose tonight

@Narada: an e-bookworm

to stay awake while i download stuff.

and you?

For the first timer, must-sees in NYC include the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, Times Square, the Empire State Building, Central Park, Brooklyn Bridge, Museum of Natural History, and Rockefeller Center in midtown Manhattan. Personally I like hanging out in Central Park in autumn when the leaves start changing into various colors. It's so peaceful sitting there you hardly notice there's a city full of cars and people just a couple of yards away from you.

don't forget the Met Museum, the Museum of Modern Art, and the World Trade Center site.

there is so much to see that it'd probably be a good idea to take a double-decker bus tour that'll allow you to see the sights from above street level (manhattan has a lot of art deco buildings that are gorgeous from higher up). the bus tour also allows you to get a better grasp of places that you might want to visit on your own depending on what your interests are.

err...a moment of weakness where you imbibe a corrupt practice? sorry 007, my google skills are suckydori and my iq today a little low.

what comes after cynicism? (interpret any way you want)

2.50 in quarters at a slot machine. yay me.

how adventurous are you with money?

don't normally like floral/fruity scents but Givenchy's Play for Her is nice on my skin

^^ implying it's more about political maneuvering than "moral highground," which was the point. and, Taiwan looks at China in the same exact way.

Taiwan and India have the military capability to take on China on territorial dispute skirmishes. To a certain extent, Vietnam can hold up on their own too, but they were trounced by China several times before.

 

Our navy and airforce, on the other hand, at present can't do anything substantial until we get our new ships and fighters delivered to us a few years from now. We have to keep quiet for a while longer while we build up our strength. We may look timid, but what else can we do? We have to rely more on diplomacy.

all true. but if the main reason China isn't responding is because of international optics (how it will look to the rest of the world) then military strength isn't the key. and if that's the case...why wait for equipment to arrive? apart from the reality that even with new ships and fighters we have no money to really practice on these things, this course of action (waiting) is exactly what China is hoping our response will be. in the meantime panatag shoal is effectively surrounded by the Chinese, Taiwan continues to make its presence felt...

The South China Sea dispute is entirely different. Our neighbors are not pro-China. In fact they are our allies and many of them also have territorial disputes with China just like us. So, as long as we don't provoke China militarily, any military agression they conduct against Pag-asa Island will be viewed by our neighbors and allies as an act of war against us, and most likely, they will come to our aid. China can't afford to be in that situation.

question: our neighbors are not pro-China but it's not like they're pro-Pinas either, right? if China wasn't bullying everyone else all at once, it isn't as if our neighbors would award us the islands we claim?

seems to me we are more petulant towards the USS Guardian than the real aggressors.

Now aside from this, I reiterate my belief that one of the major reasons China and Taiwan have so far avoided war is because of stable relations between both countries. That plus the fact that China has so much to lose, not only economically, but prestige as well in the eyes of the international community. It cannot afford to lose all its gains in the past 30 years just to pursue a policy that, at least to me, is archaic. The one China policy is something China hasn't even talked about in a long time. Whether this is still on the agenda of the polituburo, once can only speculate.

to paraphrase you, China doesn't need a good excuse if it is bent on war. so whether they have an excuse or not doesn't really matter. making up excuses is easy and not beyond the communist/fascist playbook anyway, as you point out in your Nazi example. let me paraphrase you in a way that will make it clear that we actually have the same point - it's irrelevant whether they have a legitimate excuse or not, if they want a war, they will find a way to have a war.

now let me qualify your statement a little - China has 'stable relations' with Taiwan despite the latter's history of ramming Chinese boats. so...

again, my question, why not do as Taiwan/India/Vietnam do? why be timid when sustained occupation is how our neighbors are playing the game?

this monkey can't stand to see you black and blue

give you something sweet each time

you come inside my jungle book

what is it just too good?

don't say you'll stay 'cause then you'll go away

damn, i wish i was your lover

i'll rock you til the daylight comes

make sure you are smiling and warm

i am everything, tonight i'll be your mother

i'll do such things to ease your pain

free your mind and you won't feel ashamed

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lt6r-k9Bk6o

if she looked this good, i might be lesbian too

So if China is really bent on war, it can use the poor navigational skills of innocent fisherfolk as a justification for war. All it's waiting for is a slip-up. Whether it was a deliberate ramming or just an accident really isn't the point.

like i said, they don't need an excuse to start a war. can it afford to is the million peso question. all it's waiting for is a slip up? maybe, maybe not. note that China was more aggressive during the Marcos years, and even then Marcos blew up a lighthouse the Chinese built in the Spratlys. similarly, India is fighting China on their borders. has China gone to war? the point is no it hasn't.

Fact that China and Taiwan haven't been to war after all this time is a good sign that relations between the two, though cold, are stable and civil, if not cordial.

maybe it's because of stable and civil relations, maybe it's because going to war would be economically insane. what's your point? what are you advocating?

What excuse do they need? They could just say they're conducting a live fire naval exercise in the area (with no definite end time, of course).

 

And since it's part of a disputed territory, none can claim war over territorial breaches. And if a non aligned supply ship attempts to get through the excersie area... Well accidents do happen in live fire exercises.

maybe they don't need an excuse, but i think the point being made is that it's not worth their while to up the ante with regard to Pag-asa, especially when there are other areas where there is bound to be less resistance to an aggressive move.

but really, the interesting thing here is your mention of accidents. now reasonable posters may react violently to this, but what if a boat that was blockading an area was accidentally rammed? what are they going to do, start a war over the poor navigation skills of innocent fisherfolk? taiwan and china have been in this situation and so far...no war.