posted
Rakeesh thinks he's doing some public service, but at it's heart, his motivation is that he enjoys being cruel, and seeks out people who (may or may not) be on the wrong side of history, or are backward, or maybe just isolated & skewed, and attack them, degrade them, mock them. All the while with a puffed shirt and superior smirk.
I maybe hopelessly ignorant, but at least I *don't seem* some self deluded right fighter bully, geting my gollys at the expensive of others.
You are human * Rakeesh, your soul *seems like* a parched desert devoid of kindness and I actively struggle to not wish you generalized, non specific bad luck, discord, strife and injustice.
posted
oh, two other things. One, thank you for once again validating 'what crazy crap is this guy going to come up with next?' In addition to pointy sticks, knives, I'm a humanist, and plenty of others I can now add over the top junior high shoving match insults. That's actually not so crazy, it was predictable, but still amusing.
Took a screenshot too, so if you're inclined to delete or edit, it won't be gone.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Keep it coming! Commentary on my soul from a man who has Internet arguments with me is certainly not an indicator of hysterical, narcissistic thinking on your part!
Oh, and listen, I don't actually believe you 'struggle' against those sorts of wishes. But hey, post that as a sign of your efforts at right-thinking or something, good show!
Anyway, it is another lie to claim that I am doing 'this' as some sort of public service. I have explicitly stated that this is more or less for my own amusement now.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: I'll send it to you carved in stone...what's your address?
If I sent you that I'm not sure what would happen. Would I get shot? Get a tablet etched in stone? Tying in the strange gay porn threat, would I be propositioned? Who knows! Anyway, nah brah. Go on staying on the west coast being super busy too busy to read or reply or become informed except when it's time to lose your shit and have a tantrum then your schedule opens right up amirite?
Besides, I've got a digital copy already. Why would I want a stone tablet?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, man, gimme more of that sweet, sweet Stone_Wolf tantrum! That's a new one for me. The other lazy, narcissistic jackass in my life has at times referred to me and others as communists and *royalists* of all things, but animal torture is new!
Remember this feeling, SW. Aside from the seething heat of a really good Internet badass tantrum that you're having, with that squirrel remark you're also feeling something that is probably new: you're feeling ahead of the curve. Focus on it because let's be real, it's probably not happened before and a recurrence is unlikely!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's okay, I'll go hug my kids and kiss my wife. You enjoy your cold, empty bed & house, you earned them both in spades.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
One of three predictions: one, your account may be suspended or even banned, less likely, but possible. I hope neither happens, but hey, 'your parents are whores, your soul is shit, I wish you were dead, what's your address?' are pretty brisk violations by the standards of these tame parts.
Two: most likely, the thread is locked and we're each told to drop it in spite of the fact that I've made no threats and confine my criticisms and attacks to your thinking and your ideas, whereas you have not only been explicitly personal but also hinted at violence. But that's the way things go sometimes. Anyway, you then proclaim your intent to ignore me and then go about doing your usual, middle-school level job of actually ignoring me. (Example: hey Rakeesh I'm ignoring you! is actually a contradiction)
Three, you come to some sense of embarrassment about this and apologize. It's happened before, after all. If you did I would accept, because seriously, everyone flies off the handle. Then perhaps for awhile you would either not post or would make an effort to take the thoughts and questions and posts of other members seriously, and think about a given issue deeper than an inch and longer than five minutes. Discussions would happen, it would be cool. That would be the ideal possibility, actually. It almost happened before, in fact, but my prediction would be soon enough it would be back to the entitled, lazy thinking man baby who has to be dragged with agonizing slowness to the idea that no, women aren't responsible for how you feel based on how they're dressed; no, the word 'humanist' has a meaning already and to claim it for yourself based on half-ass feel good bullshit doesn't really fly; that hey, it actually does make a difference if you vote; hey, smugly suggesting that a combat veteran rode a desk and shouldn't really be talking about gun control with any authority was a dick move...well, you get the idea.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: That's okay, I'll go hug my kids and kiss my wife. You enjoy your cold, empty bed & house, you earned them both in spades.
Will that be before or after you send me gay porn and gloating tablets? Anyway, be sure to proudly declare to your children, "Kids, Daddy wished a whoreson on the Internet was dead today!" You know, since you're now going to use your family as some sort of gloating tool in an argument on the Internet.
Anyway, here's something to seriously consider, if you can manage it. I'm not taunting you right now, but I know you're angry so it would be very difficult. Imagine I were speaking to you the way you are to me, and chose to involve your family in my words. Based on some of the things you've said about your family, think for a moment what some soul-beshitted, squirrel torturing sadist might say about them, and consider how that might make you feel.
Skip over the part where you manfully threaten to kick my ass. (That part was mockery, yes.) If I was what you say, after you called my parents whores, wished I was dead, and implicitly threatened me and then brought your family into it, what would I be saying right now instead of asking you to think about something?
This isn't some way for me to indirectly say those things without saying them. I would never call your parents whores, even if they actually were sex workers. I wouldn't threaten to send you porn, I wouldn't wish that someone in your family shot you to death, and I wouldn't say your soul was shit or that you tortured animals. Much less any of the other personal attacks that someone who *was* all of that would say.
What does that mean for your idea about all of that stuff? Isn't it a lot more likely that I think you're a well-meaning but lazy,-in-thinking, entitled goof who imagines that a self-perception of good intentions are the primary measure of correctness? Hint: that is actually what I think.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, apparently I'm the whoreson who would be better off dead, is less likable than mass murderers, whose soul is made of shit and who tortures small animals. Who in spite of being all of these things is interested in being perceived as providing a public service, or something, and who has in spite of being so universally awful has not said anything half so personal and vicious as you have to me, on two separate occasions.
Eh. Either you'll see how ridiculous it is, or you won't. My money is that in awhile you will, temporarily, but the same style of thinking will lead you right back there again.
But seriously, please do consider my question: if I loved cruelty as you say I do, and knowing what I do about you based on what you've shared about yourself here, isn't there a *lot* of awful insults I could make? Insults based only on the surface details, that would be lacking any real context or insight into your personal life that would nevertheless have a chance at being cruel? You brought your family into this ridiculous discussion, as a tool for boasting of all things. Clearly you care about them. If I were cruel as you say, wouldn't I be taking shots at them as you have at mine (wishing my father shot me to death, calling someone-probably my mother-a whore, suggesting I have none)? That's a serious question aimed at getting you to reconsider this menacing vision you have in your head.
Also, on an unrelated note: ask around, Stone_Wolf, not just here but anywhere, of respectable people with respectable lives. Ask around and see if it's a good look to: ask for people's addresses, say they should be dead, call their parents whores, compare them to dictators, sneer at what you imagine of their personal lives, so on and so forth, in an online fight you're having. Hint: it's not a good look. It's silly and imbalanced and has only two real outcomes. One, people think it's silly and childish and write you off or worse they take you seriously and you're a potentially violent lunatic. That's not me mocking you for those things-I've already done that. That's me pointing out that it looks really bad for you to do that, and the actual threats and insults make me smile rather than wound me.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Well, apparently I'm the whoreson who would be better off dead, is less likable than mass murderers, whose soul is made of shit and who tortures small animals.
Look on the bright side here, Rakeesh: at least he hasn't called you a bigot.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was going to write you a heart felt olive branch, asking you to be introspective & acknowledge your role in this...and then I realized...why would you change? You are getting exactly what you want, even admittedly so...here for your own entertainment...
Well are you not entertained?
It literally doesn't matter what I say, you will rebut w/ more bs about me as if this dance was a solo and you were simply a poor innocent victim.
I'm editing my posts with asterisks out of respect for BB.
I think you are a bad person Rakeesh. No bullshit.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It takes a big man, when he's said to another man: one of your parents is a whore, I wish you were dead, your soul is made of shit, you're worse than a dictator, and by the way where do you live to then say, "Look, you had a role in this too, ok?"
Nah. I didn't make you say any of those things, Stone_Wolf, and please don't try to kid yourself or anyone else that you're editing 'out of respect for BB'. If that had been an important principle to you, you would've done so already or more properly stopped after the first tantrum rather than doubling or tripling down.
I don't care that you think I'm a bad person, Stone_Wolf, though if I were concerned with your thoughts on that question, well, bearing in mind what I've said I think of you isn't it more likely I would be pleased? What I think about you goes only as far as what you've said here, with the single exception of disapproving that you formerly didn't vote. I don't think your mother or father is a whore, I don't wish your father had shot you to death, I don't think your soul is made of shit, I don't think you delight in cruelty, I don't think you're worse than a dictator. I don't claim to know anything about your family or personal life beyond what you say, because I can't know any of it.
I just think you're a well-meaning, intellectually lazy entitled man who believes a number of difficult things on the surface but doesn't commit to practicing many of them. For example: the idea that any insult diminishes the person making the insult. That's something you've professed here, yet if you really believed that, you would have to think you'd significantly diminished yourself.
Clearly you don't actually think that, so when the rubber meets the road you don't actually believe that making the sorts of attacks you've made diminishes you, in spite of claiming to not long ago. That's no surprise to me.
Anyway, listen, since you held up BlackBlade and Lyrhawn yourself, unprompted, not long ago as fairminded assessors of behavior here on Hatrack, I'll ask you something I've asked repeatedly since then, which you've never to my knowledge done: hit up one of your acceptable evaluators and ask 'em, 'Hey, was this remotely kosher on my part? And am I in any position to say, "C'mon dude this is your fault too!"?' Ask 'em, see what they say. You won't listen to me, you won't listen to anyone else when you throw a tantrum like this, so ask them. (But then again, I will admit they are two *actually* busy people, not the fake busy you are when you hardly ever have time to invest time in a question or post except when you feel you've been mistreated.)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Well, apparently I'm the whoreson who would be better off dead, is less likable than mass murderers, whose soul is made of shit and who tortures small animals.
Look on the bright side here, Rakeesh: at least he hasn't called you a bigot.
I don't have to take that kind of talk from some national guard desk jockey chickenhawk!
...time passes...
Ok that was out of line dude but cmon it was partly your fault that I said that, right?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
Seriously, though, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the level of cognitive dissonance required to make "calling someone a bigot for saying all sorts of awful, bigoted things and justly proving themselves to be a bigoted person" mean and dehumanizing, but makes "harassing someone, signing them up for a bunch of gay porn (why?), calling someone's parent a whore, calling them human excrement and saying I wish their father had killed them as a child" a-okay because they disagreed with me about gun control in a thread literally dedicated to debating gun control. I'll get back to you once I have that figured out.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
To be fair, I'm not sure if he ever actually did that or if it was an idea he had or wished he'd had once. It would be difficult for me to tell, since, you know, porn in your inbox gets flagged and you never see it again. As for why that would have been a worrying threat, well, only Stone_Wolf can answer that.
Also to clarify: I am a bad person who delights in cruelty, it's my *soul* that is covered in excrement, Dogbreath. You were probably too busy playing Halo in ROTC instead of being an actual soldier to have caught that. (I admit I am dead to many kinds of shame, but it would be a long time after I had made that sort of misstep with someone before I felt able to make personal attacks against them, yknow? And yet with Stone_Wolf, weeks or months after literally sneering at the military service of an actual combat veteran for expressing an opinion on firearms in America, you're back to being a bully, Dogbreath.)
Anyway, as for gun control, well, I did agree with many of the suggestions SW had along those lines. But from the start I disagreed with the danger assessment he had of firearms, and especially with the supposed dangerousness of other things such as knives, cars, and pointy sticks. But after awhile it just gets tedious, man. I hung in there. I challenged his nonsense about how dangerous cars are, or knives, but although he could probably guess I thought his position was stupid, I didn't say so.
But when you blew right past your own acknowledged authority figure, in this case Lyrhawn, more than once making the same or related points without any of them even phasing you, eh. I stopped caring about his having to *guess* I thought his arguments were stupid at that point.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are the Halo games worth playing? I never got into the series (I've never had an XBox, only ever been a PC gamer really) but I saw they released a remastered version of the first 4 games and thought it might be worth getting into.
---
One thing I do want to say since it's been brought up again: my service record isn't particularly interesting or noteworthy, and the highest awards I ever received (other than the medals that everyone gets as "participation trophies" for various deployments or campaigns) were a certcom and two NAM writeups that got lost somewhere and I may or may not ever get. I don't think being a veteran or even having a decent amount of experience with firearms makes me any sort of expert on gun control. Lord knows - back in 2011 I deployed alongside a platoon from 1st Recon, a lot of crazy dudes who were pretty much the actual embodiment of the male power fantasy action hero we've been talking about, guys who you might actually call firearm experts - and nowadays some of them have pretty wack ideas about gun control or Obama taking away their guns or politics in general. (Though they also scoff at the idea of Joe Beer-belly Schmoe who maybe goes to the range twice a year suddenly transforming into James Bond and stopping an active shooter at the drop of a hat...)
The only objection I really had is that since I once, a year and a half ago, made an off-hand comment saying that I couldn't really think of a justifiable reason for police to have machine guns for purposes of "crowd control" (while acknowledging that when reporters say "machine guns" they often mean "assault rifles"), that somehow warranted mockery of my military service and experience. Which, I should note, I only ever mentioned to confirm "yes, I do know what a machine is and my opinion is valid", and not at all "my experience means my opinion means more."
And yet that post seems to have been the turning point from being a dude who, up until that point, SW had never had a problem with and was pretty friendly towards, to becoming one of his targets. Stone Wolf's targets are Bad People, and so the "don't insult anyone" logic doesn't really apply. It's OK to bully them. It's okay to threaten to punch or kick them, or call them idiots and morons, or mock their career choices and harass them. Heck, as we saw today, it's even okay to tell them that you wish they were dead and insult their family. They're not really human beings with real feelings and families, not people deserving any amount of respect or dignity. They're targets. Victims. People he can safely bully and harass and intimidate from behind his keyboard until they finally give up at leave his playground.
Which is why I'm encouraging you give up here, Rakeesh. For better or worse, Heisenberg is right: Hatrack is the Stone Wolf show now. It's a place for him and Ron Lambert and whatever Clive alt shows up next. There's nothing left worth staying for any more.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, because you are absolutely open to the possibility that you bullied and victimized anyone. Hell, even to the possibility that in the balance you just behaved worse.
After calling one of my parents a whore, wishing I were dead, saying my soul was shit, that I delighted in cruelty, that I was worse than a dictator, and then asking for my address you suggested that *I* was somehow in part responsible for all of that.
There is a neglible chance you would take seriously the idea that you behaved like a bully towards Dogbreath or anyone else. Can we just skip past the part where you pretend-even to yourself-to be interested in copping to any of that? Dogbreath is right, it's never someone else's fault. It only ever tops out at 'hey it was your fault too, and I'm not going to admit I did anything wrong unless you do too!'
Not that I would, but if I ever called another poster-hell, if I called *Clive*-a son of a whore, I wouldn't be so much a chickenshit as to insist they apologize for something too, unless they said something on that level. If I ever sneered at someone's experience in combat, indirectly calling them a coward and a chickenhawk, as you did with Dogbreath, it would be a long time and my case would have to be air****ingtight before I ever got all shirty with them again. I would simply be too embarrassed.
But that's you, man. You're the guy who when his feelings get hurt, gets to say *anything*, and it's never just your fault. Meanwhile in the land of grownups, the notion of fighting words went out of style decades ago. Except in action movies, anyway.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Do you really feel like I've bullied & victimized you DB?
Yes.
Do you not realize just how beyond the pale your behavior is here? Do you see anyone else here, anyone at all, doing any of the things you do? Denigrating and mocking them for their life choices? Attacking their family? Calling them human excrement? Saying they wish they were dead? These are things I have never said to another human being, and probably never will. Certainly not just because someone pointed out some flaws in my take on gun control.
More importantly, nobody here has ever done that to you. You seem to feel you're entitled to personally attack, mock, bully, and belittle anyone and everyone who rubs you the wrong way - often by merely disagreeing with you or, by demonstrating you were wrong about something, making you look silly. It's made this forum a hostile and unwelcoming place, for me at least.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If anyone in the world has been set up for failure, it's Kim Jung Un. I feel sorry for him...also that movie The Interview was way better than I expected.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
Even Clive Candy, universally regarded here as a jerk of the highest order and a creepy misogynist, has never outright called someone's mother or father a whore to my knowledge, Stone_Wolf. And given that attacking women for monetizing sex is rather Clive's thing, that's saying something!
And as for Ron Lambert, well there's plenty I don't like about the man's views on politics, religion, and America in general but he is always civilized, even at his harshest and (to me, anyway) most unfair and least honest criticism. Even Ron, who I think you will agree doesn't get a whole lot of respect around here never called anyone a son or daughter of a whore. I mean I supposedly loathe America and despise freedom and stuff, but I would be surprised if it even *occurred* to Ron to say someone's soul was made of shit, or that their parents were whores, or to wish that they were dead. I don't think Ron would even think any of that trash much less say it. If Ron were to, for example, smear someone's military service even by accident I have little doubt he wouldn't eat humble pie quickly and thoroughly. If he would do a smear like that in the first place.
So here's to you, buddy: you are far more personal, derogatory, and violent in your personal attacks on posters and their families that you don't like than Ron Lambert and Clive Candy. Here's to you, buddy! And remember: it's everybody else's fault!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, a minor note: typically an olive branch isn't 'I will admit partial responsibility only if you do as well'. An olive branch is when you express regret for something you said or did, because you don't hold other people responsible for choices you made. An olive branch is a choice to offer up a little vulnerability in the interest of making nice, even though it may be exploited.
You don't offer olive branches, Stone_Wolf. You guard with jealous aggression your own perceived status based on how others treat you, and you're never more than a few weeks if you're regularly posting away from lashing out when someone gets too far in the red in your personal emotional status equations.
Here is an example of an olive branch: Hey man, I will say that I felt pressured into it, but my temper got the better of me and I flew way off the handle and said some things that were totally uncalled for. I'm can't say that I like you or think you're a good guy, but I shouldn't have said that stuff and I regret it. Online sometimes it's easier to lose one's temper, but that's on me.
I've actually said shades of that to other posters before, over the years, because I do enjoy arguing too much and get carried away sometimes. Whether I've offered such olive branches enough or not is impossible for me to say. I know I've done it to Ron once over the years, offered such an olive branch anyway. I believe it was based on ignorance of SDA beliefs, but I'm not sure.
Anyway, that's an example of an olive branch. I'm pretty confident that's a fair example, much more fair than yours. But don't take my word for it: go to one of your judges for this sort of thing. At this point I note that you've never actually done that, I suspect because you know what posters such as Lyrhawn or BlackBlade would say about your 'olive branch'.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
SW: Why don't you take a step back and calm yourself before reengaging? Also squirrels around the world have been frantically reporting your post to Rakeesh demanding their torture.
I appreciate self-censorship. But come on man. You are better than that. And I wouldn't let others insult you by just bleeping them out.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, JB, take heart: I hardly needed a demand to get me to torture animals. As a psycho born of prostitutes who delights in cruelty deep down in my soiled soul, I'm never very far from animal torture anyway!
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: You are human excr****t Rakeesh, your soul *seems like* a parched desert devoid of kindness and I actively struggle to not wish you generalized, non specific bad luck, discord, strife and injustice.
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Go back to tor*****g squirrels ps***o
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: That's okay, I'll go hug my kids and kiss my wife. You enjoy your cold, empty bed & house, you earned them both in spades.
I was right to call out your "civility" crusade for being the empty-headed pompous moralizing it was. I was right to spit on it.
If you ever start trying to police the forum's civility again because you think we should be more polite to bigots lest we hurt their bigot feelings, someone needs to come by your house and slap you with a rolled up copy of these posts to remind you of your own standards.
Seriously, though, I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the level of cognitive dissonance required to make "calling someone a bigot for saying all sorts of awful, bigoted things and justly proving themselves to be a bigoted person" mean and dehumanizing, but makes "harassing someone, signing them up for a bunch of gay porn (why?), calling someone's parent a whore, calling them human excrement and saying I wish their father had killed them as a child" a-okay because they disagreed with me about gun control in a thread literally dedicated to debating gun control. I'll get back to you once I have that figured out.
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath:
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: Do you really feel like I've bullied & victimized you DB?
Yes.
Do you not realize just how beyond the pale your behavior is here? Do you see anyone else here, anyone at all, doing any of the things you do? Denigrating and mocking them for their life choices? Attacking their family? Calling them human excrement? Saying they wish they were dead? These are things I have never said to another human being, and probably never will. Certainly not just because someone pointed out some flaws in my take on gun control.
More importantly, nobody here has ever done that to you. You seem to feel you're entitled to personally attack, mock, bully, and belittle anyone and everyone who rubs you the wrong way - often by merely disagreeing with you or, by demonstrating you were wrong about something, making you look silly. It's made this forum a hostile and unwelcoming place, for me at least.
These are good posts. Come back to the forum, Dogbreath. It has a lot of shit that needs overwriting with good posts.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
I've considered you a friend in the past. I've always thought that while our views often differed on hot button topic, at the end of the day I could still like you as a person and you were reasonable, just differently minded. Nothing wrong with that.
But I don't know how I can reconcile that with what I've seen in your comments to Rakeesh recently, and most egregiously in this thread. If you can't summon the will to treat Rakeesh with respect personally, then at least summon the will to treat this community with respect by not posting personal insults on this board. Putting asterisks in your insults doesn't make them okay.
My word probably doesn't carry a lot of weight, but here goes: Your very next post needs to be an apology to Rakeesh. It should really be followed by an apology to the community at large. I don't care that you felt provoked, and certainly I've seen some poking and prodding on Rakeesh's side, but nothing to warrant your reaction. We're all adults here, and "he started it" is an unacceptable response.
If you blow past this without an apology, then I am done conversing with you. There's already so little left of this community, I'm not going to contribute to poisoning what remains.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:I was going to write you a heart felt olive branch, asking you to be introspective & acknowledge your role in this...
Sure you didn't.
But hey, I'll bite: what was my role in inciting you to call me a son of a whore, to wish I was dead, to say I was a piece of shit and my soul was barren, to say that I loved cruelty and tortured animals, to wish that my father had shot me to death as a child...well, you remember what you said.
What was my role in 'this'? What is it about challenging and then, yes, mocking your position on the dangerousness of firearms and the similarities between firearms and other machines, that diminishes your own responsibility in saying those things? In saying anything, actually. Where exactly does your own responsibility for the words you use end, and the responsibility of other people for the words you use start? You're now expressing the idea that this boundary of responsibility does exist, so where?
Also, I will note entirely without surprise your failure to measure up to *another* standard you set for yourself and have in the past tried to convince others to follow. The first standard was that critical judgments of people diminish the one doing the judging. Obviously you no longer think that's true. The second standard is the one where someone else, in this case Lyrhawn, was held up as a fair judge of behavior by you, Stone_Wolf. Of course it wasn't really fair to put someone else up on such a pedestal, and in the event you didn't actually believe in that, either.
Another prediction confirmed! Thanks, buddy! (Hey, for what it's worth Lyrhawn, I don't think I can recall a time you weren't fair minded. That said, I wouldn't endorse you as some sort of external conscience or something for myself mostly because I don't believe that's a good thing to do but also because I have no doubt sometimes you would rule against me!)
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Title of post: Not Defending SW Subtitle: But
I do think some people here make a sport of poking at SW. I am not sure why JB doesn't police it; it's the kind of thing I would police if I was a mod. (God forbid.)
That being said, I'm still disappointed and surprised to see the kind of juvenile outburst that happened here.
Everyone now has to write three things they like about each other. </nag>
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
If JB should police that, should he also police the way that Ron, Clive, and certain others are treated? If someone is going to spout BS and act the fool, I see no need to treat them with kid gloves because they're sensitive or whatever.
Stone Wolf gets the reactions that he does not because he is Stone Wolf, but because of the things he chooses to write and the way he chooses to act.
Posts: 572 | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, maybe. I'm thinking it might be of benefit to shut down threads that have already devolved, not so much a general "be nice" rule. Sometimes the Ron and Clive threads end up in the same kind of place.
But since that would prevent a lot of the activity that even happens here anymore, I don't know.
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You kno, one thing that never really gets discussed...people are afraid, of being hurt, killed, raped, tortured or in a word, harmed.
And really, why wouldn't they be? Why is it so unreasonable in so many of your seeming views that people who fear for their bodily harm do something about it?
Or least if they are safe and careful about it?
If we could wave a magic wand, it wouldn't be waved and guns would disappear, the waving would be for the end of human on human violence in general.
And I'd bet the majority of humanity would agree with that wish.
Posts: 6683 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: "We're all adults here, and "he started it" is an unacceptable response. "
I did not say this.
I was, perhaps, being proactively defensive when I said that. I should have used ' instead of " since it wasn't a direct quote.
It IS true that he's baited you, many people have. I was acknowledging that and then going to the next step.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: Well, maybe. I'm thinking it might be of benefit to shut down threads that have already devolved, not so much a general "be nice" rule. Sometimes the Ron and Clive threads end up in the same kind of place.
But since that would prevent a lot of the activity that even happens here anymore, I don't know.
We're already so low on threads. If we start shutting them down whenever things start to go off the tracks instead of trying to straighten them out, we'd pretty much just be left with the Last Post Thread.
I mean, geez, I think the Steam threads outnumber the non steam active threads at the moment.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: You kno, one thing that never really gets discussed...people are afraid, of being hurt, killed, raped, tortured or in a word, harmed.
And really, why wouldn't they be? Why is it so unreasonable in so many of your seeming views that people who fear for their bodily harm do something about it?
I haven't really participated in this discussion yet, but since I'm here I'll go ahead and take a swing at this:
I think the biggest problem here, in answering why it's unreasonable if you fear for your bodily safety to want to do something about it, is not that we don't want to do something about it but rather have a radically different idea of what "doing something about it" should be.
For better or worse, we're not cavemen, or even frontiersmen - hunters and trappers in a lawless land, fighting off bears and Indians and protecting our homestead. We live in a civilized country, in a land governed by rule of law and a social contract. The reason you can go out today, unarmed, go to work or the store or your friends house, with very low chance of being robbed and almost negligible chance of being raped, tortured, or murdered isn't because the rapists, torturers and murderers and scalpers out there aren't afraid that you might shoot them, it's because we live in a civilized country where citizens are governed by a respect for law, respect for the sanctity and dignity of human life, and respect for the rights of their fellow human beings.
Indeed, civilization itself is the human race's answer to "doing something about it" when it comes to not dying a horrible, violent death. And we have various institutions that aid in doing that something. And please note: some of these civil institution are doing a poor job or even failing at the moment, and I sincerely believe if we want to lower violent crime rates we need to improve this institutions.
We have schools and, hopefully, the Family (which is absolutely a social institution) to help mold children into conscientious, well educated, informed citizens. And also teach less tangible things: respect for others space and possessions, how to navigate social situations, conflict deescalation and resolution, resolving fights with words rather than fists. The value of making an honest living.
We have mental institutions, psychologists and psychiatrists to help deal with mentally unstable who might otherwise turn to violence. And that can mean anything from anger management training to mental institutions in the most extreme cases.
We have (or should have) social programs, welfare, healthcare, foodstamps, housing assistance, as well as widespread efforts to combat poverty. Partly because poverty is an evil in and of itself, but also because crime rates are very strongly linked to poverty and impoverished areas.
We have a police force to enforce the law and come to the aid of citizens who might be in danger, and to confront and apprehend those violent people. We have prisons in which to protect society from those violent people and (hopefully) educate and reform those prisoners while they're there.
We have a military to protect us from foreign invaders, or I suppose in this day and age, maybe terrorists who are plotting against us and our allies.
And many other things too... there's a lot of improvements to be made, but for better or worse we have mostly ameliorated the threats to our safety that you mention from strangers. Consider:
Rape: the odds of being raped by a stranger hiding in a bush (or a bathroom stall) are extremely low. Most rape victims know their rapists. Further, 90% of rape victims are either intoxicated or drugged when they are raped (many aren't even conscious) - neither of those are cases where using a gun to defend yourself would be ethical or often even possible. (Can you imagine a club full of drunk or high people with guns? Every time I've gone out on a pub crawl I've seen a couple of fights between raging drunk bros being broken up by bouncers. Can you imagine the chaos if those men were dumb enough to go out drinking packing heat?)
Murder: Unless you're involved in gang warfare, the main ways to get yourself murdered are to be a victim of domestic violence or get in a fight. Ironically, of the ways to truly be a victim of a random person deciding to kill you - a drive-by shooting gone wrong, a serial killer, or a mass shooting event - you're very unlikely to be successful at defending yourself before being shot, and often these crimes are committed with legally purchased guns.
Torture: I don't know if this is something that happens except in fringe cases.
I sincerely believe that the number of accidents, or negligent homicides (using lethal force when it's not really justified) caused by people carrying is a much bigger threat to society than the negligible number of cases where somebody conceal carrying actually prevented a crime. More importantly, though, I think that sort of cowboy, vigilante mentality is destructive to the social bonds that ties our civilization together. We've collectively decided we're not going to be savages, and part of that social contract is that we leave law enforcement, protection of citizens, and justice in the hands of our government. I think the action hero mindset that goes into "I'm going to conceal carry and make citizens arrests and defend my family against murderers and rapists and it's going to be awesome" is in and of itself dangerous, and can warp the way you perceive everyone and everything around you. (A point kmbboots made several times earlier, you should really read her links)
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why is it so unreasonable in so many of your seeming views that people who fear for their bodily harm do something about it?
This rather presumes that owning a gun (and thus dramatically increasing the danger of death faced by your family and loved ones) is "doing something about it" as opposed to "making it worse."
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Stone_Wolf_: You kno, one thing that never really gets discussed...people are afraid, of being hurt, killed, raped, tortured or in a word, harmed.
And really, why wouldn't they be? Why is it so unreasonable in so many of your seeming views that people who fear for their bodily harm do something about it?
Or least if they are safe and careful about it?
If we could wave a magic wand, it wouldn't be waved and guns would disappear, the waving would be for the end of human on human violence in general.
And I'd bet the majority of humanity would agree with that wish.
I'll take a straight shot at this. The difficulty here is twofold. One, I suggest that you and most people in the world are too afraid and of the wrong things. As Dogbreath has said, in the cases of both murder and rape, the most likely attackers simply aren't the sorts of threats it appears you're concerned about at all. Murder or rape by stranger is much less common that murder or rape by a known or even trusted or loved party. Self-defense and defense of family from threats of physical violence have been recurring themes with you-and that makes sense to me. It's a human, not simply a male, impulse to feel sorry about violence and to seek to prevent or mitigate it.
Given that, consider checking out https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gift_of_Fear . Not only does it have a lot of useful things to teach about how to deal with threats you and particularly your family might face (especially your wife and daughter(s), since women are more at risk from violent crime), it also has a lot of useful things to say about how physically dangerous the world around you, as an American, actually is.
I'm not kidding when I say that I'm not sure which would actually help keep your family safe more from actual threats: reading and embracing the lessons of a book like that, or a firearm in your possession even kept secure at home and if you're extremely well trained in its use. Admittedly I have a bias in this.
The other difficulty, or so it seems to me, is that you don't seem to understand risk and anecdotal evidence very well. Of course that is a criticism, but it's not meant as an insult. Please keep in mind that you think I'm wrong about all sorts of things too. One of the difficulties with the idea of 'firearm for personal safety' is that, yes, absolutely in certain scenarios a firearm would make you and those around you much, much safer than you and they otherwise would be. I don't dispute that. The problem is twofold: not only is it not guaranteed that even in the incredibly unlikely event that you're in such a scenario, would you be able to taken by surprise use a firearm effectively, the problem is also that every single day, all the tens of thousands of days that those scenarios *aren't* happening, that firearm adds a risk to the safety of yourself and your family. So if a firearm is to be considered an insurance policy taken out against a dangerous and unpredictable world, then like any insurance policy the cost must be considered as well as the potential security it offers. The small, constant danger of ownership of a firearm must be added to the 'cost' column of this particular insurance policy.
So that's it, twofold: an overestimate of the danger presented to you and your family by the world, and an underestimate of the risk of possessing a firearm-even with good training-poses to your family and yourself.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
First: nobody here has made any mention at all of restricting hunting licenses, or of outlawing hunting, or banning hunting rifles or shotguns. My dad and I went hunting fairly often when I was growing up, I don't think it's really an issue. (Even countries with very strict gun laws, like the UK, still allow people to go hunting and have hunting rifles)
There have been 6 people killed by bears in California since 1837. The last person killed by a bear in California was in 2008, and that was a captive bear. The last person killed by a wild bear in California was in 1875.
The chances of you or a family member being randomly killed by a grizzly bear are astronomically low. Like "hasn't happened in over 100 years" low. I really don't really think carrying a gun because you're afraid of bear attacks is really a reasonable precaution unless maybe you're a park ranger and are actively seeking out the bears or going near their dens or something.
Likewise, during the LA riots, of the people killed during those riots, 14 were white. 3 were killed in fires, 3 by riot-related accidents, 8 were murdered. Of those murders, 2 were people getting in a fight, and another 3 were drive by shootings where the victims had literally no idea they were about to get shot until they were shot. Only one was female, only one was under 18. (Edward Travens was 15) Yet your father was in a position during the riots where he saved his own life, as well as your life, "more than once" using his gun. Were these actual situations where people were about to kill him and/or you, and he used his gun to actually save his life? Or was it maybe situations where you all were in sketchy areas, or maybe being harassed, and afterwards he said "whew, good thing I had my gun on me, I don't know how that would have turned out?" Because the numbers from the riot alone show that it probably would have turned out the exact same as if he didn't have his gun, but I'm genuinely interested to hear those stories if you're willing to share.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
(Hey, for what it's worth Lyrhawn, I don't think I can recall a time you weren't fair minded. That said, I wouldn't endorse you as some sort of external conscience or something for myself mostly because I don't believe that's a good thing to do but also because I have no doubt sometimes you would rule against me!)
