We need Duke Nuke'em
Paris attack.... how might we protect ourselves?
- Thread starter PaulS
- Start date
Mtns2Skies
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Messages
- 5,631
- Display Name
Display name:
Mtns2Skies
Yes please and thank you.
Religion has little to nothing to do with it. Look at the columbine shooting. Disgruntled people will be disgruntled and cause senseless pain regardless of their justification.
The real solution is food.
LandSickness
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- May 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,023
- Display Name
Display name:
fri tale
I conceal carry and I am armed whenever I can't account for my or my family's personal safety. Unfortunately, we need to account for this standard of safety in every public building and as best as we can, at outdoor public venues.
Metal detectors EVERYWHERE. Armed security EVERYWHERE. We can't identify every enemy, so we need to cover all of the bases. Guns in the hands of those protecting you shouldn't be "intimidating" and I won't accept the excuse that it's too expensive. We burn money on less important things in this country.
Metal detectors EVERYWHERE. Armed security EVERYWHERE. We can't identify every enemy, so we need to cover all of the bases. Guns in the hands of those protecting you shouldn't be "intimidating" and I won't accept the excuse that it's too expensive. We burn money on less important things in this country.
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
Yes please and thank you.
Religion has little to nothing to do with it. Look at the columbine shooting. Disgruntled people will be disgruntled and cause senseless pain regardless of their justification.
Religion has everything to do with it. Why would these people be disgruntled they were brought to a first world country and kept in comfort and safety. Religious beliefs are the only thing making them disgruntled. Disgruntled is a sure fine newspeak way of saying cold blooded murdering terrorists.
https://youtu.be/tHuDKQYQCHc
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Yeah, a bunch of wannabe-heroes shooting from random directions should quickly raise the body count.
Lindberg
Final Approach
It's simply incorrect to say there's no terrorism in/from indonesia. And this is from the NYT.
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/03/09/opinion/defusing-terror-in-indonesia.html?_r=0
Dav8or
Final Approach
You watch too many movies. The best solution is to drop to the ground and play dead. That makes you a harder target, a less enticing target and gives you the best possible protection against a possible bomb blast. Not very heroic, I know but it is your best chance of survival and it's not guaranteed.
Yes please and thank you.
Religion has little to nothing to do with it. Look at the columbine shooting. Disgruntled people will be disgruntled and cause senseless pain regardless of their justification.
Exactly, the real study that needs to be evaluated is the causes of this sociopathy and psychopathy, and the 80% answer is abuse and neglect, especially as children. You have the 20% that are born broken, but they tend more into the serial killers rather than rage killers, seeking sexual pleasure from their acts. The 80% are typically what we would call "losers", they lost in the birth lottery and are in a social caste of "outcasts".
So the question that stands is "how do you prevent people who didn't win in the birth lottery from becoming outcasts?" When you look at the structure of our society and economy, you come to realize that this is not possible, because our society is based on winners taking advantage of losers. It costs much more to live as a poor person than rich making it harder to get out of servitude. And once in trouble, our 'social safety net' treats people as unwanted pets.
If you want to figure out how to deal with a problem, you have to understand the root of the problem. Mankind has one mandate that transcends religions and philosophies and that is "Be kind and take care of each other."; and that is what we utterly refuse to do. That we are surprised at the results we have kind of astounds me as they are what I expect they would be. You can't abuse and neglect a large percentage of people and expect none of them to snap. That the rate is as low as it is is what I find somewhat surprising.
Dav8or
Final Approach
Oh boy, here we go... Don't forget water. I'm sure these attackers were thirsty too. If only there were a way to sustainably produce food, water and energy everywhere in the world for everyone...
Oh boy, here we go... Don't forget water. I'm sure these attackers were thirsty too. If only there were a way to sustainably produce food, water and energy everywhere in the world for everyone...
You bet, water is a prerequisite for the food, our food needs more unpolluted fresh water than we do. This doesn't change the fact that the strife around the world is based in 2/3rds of the population being hungry; and that allowing that makes us unworthy as a species.
I think, if we're honest about it, maintaining the kind of free society we enjoy and having absolute prevention of terrorist attacks are incompatible.
Now, for me personally if the price of maintaining a free way of life with privacy and all the protections of the constitution(including the ones we've lost) is worth losing a few people to the occasional terror attack... and that could easily mean myself or a loved one but the odds of any of us being killed by terrorism are incredibly low. It should really be somewhere near the bottom of one's worry list to be honest. Besides, if we as a society are cool with sending our soldiers out to face rifle fire and IEDs and all the other hazards of a warzone with the goal of defending those freedoms, why the heck are we selling those freedoms out for a marginal improvement in safety on something that's less likely than being hit by lightning? Seems kind of cowardly IMHO.
We really can't stop it. Think about it, is it really that hard to put something together that will blow up or grab a gun and shoot a bunch of people if you don't care if you live or die in the end? Probably not. I believe the reason we don't see it more often is, at the end of the day, almost none of us want to die and very few of us really want to kill.
Concealed carry is a nice option. I think that's the best word for it- option. IF you happen to be where one of these attacks happen and IF you happen not be killed in the initial assault, and IF you happen to be in a good firing position with no innocents on the other side of the target, and IF the bad guy looks away or has a gun jam or something long enough for you to get the gun out, readied, and line up a shot yeah sure. That would be a great thing and I hope I'd be able to pull it off were I ever in that situation. There's an awful lot of "IF" in that, but it may be the best we can do and still remain a free society.
On the rushing the target thing. Yeah the numbers make sense, but... people don't work that way. These things are happening fast, those people were out for a night on the town. They were not thinking about terrorism or rushing bad guys or anything like that. Stuff goes down, people get scared, people panic, they run, they try to protect their wives/girlfriends/children. They do not make coordinated zerg rush attacks on assault rifle wielding maniacs- it just doesn't happen.
The best we can do is remain vigilant, think on our feet, remain strong, and for the love of god please let's not add a bunch more needless invasion of privacy and violations of constitutional rights. Put more cops on the street if you need to but let's not sell out the very thing we say we're fighting for in the name of safety.
Now, for me personally if the price of maintaining a free way of life with privacy and all the protections of the constitution(including the ones we've lost) is worth losing a few people to the occasional terror attack... and that could easily mean myself or a loved one but the odds of any of us being killed by terrorism are incredibly low. It should really be somewhere near the bottom of one's worry list to be honest. Besides, if we as a society are cool with sending our soldiers out to face rifle fire and IEDs and all the other hazards of a warzone with the goal of defending those freedoms, why the heck are we selling those freedoms out for a marginal improvement in safety on something that's less likely than being hit by lightning? Seems kind of cowardly IMHO.
We really can't stop it. Think about it, is it really that hard to put something together that will blow up or grab a gun and shoot a bunch of people if you don't care if you live or die in the end? Probably not. I believe the reason we don't see it more often is, at the end of the day, almost none of us want to die and very few of us really want to kill.
Concealed carry is a nice option. I think that's the best word for it- option. IF you happen to be where one of these attacks happen and IF you happen not be killed in the initial assault, and IF you happen to be in a good firing position with no innocents on the other side of the target, and IF the bad guy looks away or has a gun jam or something long enough for you to get the gun out, readied, and line up a shot yeah sure. That would be a great thing and I hope I'd be able to pull it off were I ever in that situation. There's an awful lot of "IF" in that, but it may be the best we can do and still remain a free society.
On the rushing the target thing. Yeah the numbers make sense, but... people don't work that way. These things are happening fast, those people were out for a night on the town. They were not thinking about terrorism or rushing bad guys or anything like that. Stuff goes down, people get scared, people panic, they run, they try to protect their wives/girlfriends/children. They do not make coordinated zerg rush attacks on assault rifle wielding maniacs- it just doesn't happen.
The best we can do is remain vigilant, think on our feet, remain strong, and for the love of god please let's not add a bunch more needless invasion of privacy and violations of constitutional rights. Put more cops on the street if you need to but let's not sell out the very thing we say we're fighting for in the name of safety.
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
Freedom is only compatible with certain populations. Mix populations and a freedom based society will not function. Some populations are incapable of living in a free society, diversity and freedom are incompatible. Go back to your gated communities and reflect on that a bit before replying.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 23,916
- Display Name
Display name:
Bob Noel
(seen on CNN this morning) one of the witnesses said that two shooters worked as a team, one covering the crowd while the other was shooting people.
In other words, the pondscum have adapted tactics to deal with people rushing the shooters.
But we don't have a truly free society, and the two things we lost from the original constitution are what cost us that, we now have a monopolized production of currency, and it is a fiat currency. We have the illusion of a free market, but we don't really because the source of the capital is a private monopoly. Everybody kicks up to the Fed whose franchise is managed by Rothschild Group. It is this entity, not Americans, that brings terrorism to our shores as well as to Europe and Israel. It is Sunni Islam's relationship with the Fed and Petrodollars that is the source of the Sunni-Shia conflict, and the reason Shia Syria (the govt part) and Iran are our enemies, they won't pump oil in dollars.
The question I have has always been, "Why do we go to war to defend what we revolted from in the first place?"
There is nothing about America today the founders would approve of.
The question I have has always been, "Why do we go to war to defend what we revolted from in the first place?"
There is nothing about America today the founders would approve of.
Dav8or
Final Approach
This is true. The ISIS operatives and the typical mass shooters are exactly this type of person. Their training for horrific acts in adulthood starts around kindergarten when they are identified and excluded by their peers. For the first time in history, these outcast people can find a sense of community somewhere on the internet. It also gives them a voice and ultimately the media at large will make them famous.
The internet is a two edged sword though. With the rise of internet bulling, violent content, access to forbidden things and forbidden knowledge, we are likely radicalizing these people faster and in greater numbers than ever before. Traditionally, the vast majority of social outcasts, AKA "losers" grow up and go through life completely harmlessly, but the internet is changing that.
Tough times ahead for sure. IMO, the best way to avoid attacks like these Paris attacks here, is to stop the flow of Muslim immigrants and for everyone everywhere to pay attention to the "losers" around us. Like I said most are decent people, but there are some boiling inside and working toward their own fame and/or purpose for their existence.
James331
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2014
- Messages
- 20,309
- Display Name
Display name:
James331
You open your boarders to any person with a sob story, "embrace" every culture, almost to a extent above your own culture, put your nose in other countries business... and disarm your citizens, I really don't see how this is such a surprise.
LandSickness
Cleared for Takeoff
- Joined
- May 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,023
- Display Name
Display name:
fri tale
In the history of ballistics "bravery" has never stopped a bullet.
You have to build the infrastructure to create this type of society first though. People will not choose to do something not proven unless their life is immediately threatened, or complete ****e in general. We give the greedy the run of society, and they make us fat and content at the cost of starving and abusing 2/3rds of the population they consider, "lower humans". We filter our perception of ourselves with snippets of altered history, patriotic and religious dogma, and willfull blindness. Then we act shocked when terrorists desperate to change the situation of their people come and inflict some suffering in return all, "Hey, why did you all do that? We send you tons of money..." It's the money that corrupts their society and gives the despots that cause their misery their power.
We as a society in the US have no real perception of the misery our lifestyle spreads around the globe.
Dav8or
Final Approach
No good deed goes unpunished. Germany must be starting to realize how much they have screwed themselves right about now.
I warned my cousin it would likely end badly, she thinks not, we'll see what happens. The vetting process was what failed, or more accurately doesn't really exist.
Freedom is only compatible with certain populations. Mix populations and a freedom based society will not function. Some populations are incapable of living in a free society, diversity and freedom are incompatible. Go back to your gated communities and reflect on that a bit before replying.
Well where I live gates and fences are for horses and cattle so... I may have a bit different take on it than most. I can say the idea of living somewhere like that... especially with the HOAs and all the rules/laws/etc governing everything you do sounds like a miserable life to me. I guess some like that, but I won't be moving into one by choice.
I do have a story about security though which pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole notion. I was in high school when the columbine attack happened. I remember friends of mine being under suspicion as "the type of person who might do that here".... which was just ridiculous if you actually knew them at all but people are dumb and judge by stereotype. They were called in and interrogated about all manner of silly things. I was personally questioned along with a friend because someone overheard a conversation where we talked about pipe bombs. Took us half a day to remember that we'd been discussing playing a video game in which pipe bombs were a weapon.
It went on though, eventually the school put up a chain link fence and gate that was locked at all times around the back side of the school by the parking lot. This annoyed us, mainly because this where we parked and it made us walk around the building. Being mostly farm boys, we reckoned we could climb this fence easily and one day we tried- we were correct, took a few seconds. I then had an idea in my head... I checked with a teacher I knew well(and in retrospect fortunately knew me well enough to know I wasn't going on a killing spree) and asked about their fire drill plan. Sure enough, they were routing people straight into a locked gate in case of fire. I pointed this out to the teacher, he brought it up with the administration. They ended up giving a key to one of the teachers and called it a solution.
Hope they've either changed that since then or they never have a fire there.A less amusing and tragic example of security endangering people was the relatively recent Germanwings crash. That locked cockpit door they put in to stop one sort of terrorism enabled another. I firmly believe had that lock not been there, that aircraft probably would have landed safely. Also, look at United 93, the shoe bomber incident, and more. Ordinary people being aware and taking action prevents terrorism. Not some overreaching bureaucratic system. Those are always "hackable". However, post 9/11 nobody is going to be able to take over and aircraft that way again. The passengers will stop them. That's how we fight terrorism, we stop trying to control the population and empower them to act. It is really the only chance(short of stopping the reason for terrorism existing but that's another multi-page discussion of outrage).
Jay Honeck
Touchdown! Greaser!
When we were there last month, the hoard was just arriving. The Germans seemed resigned to it, and were reopening our old airbase outside of Heidelburg to process them.
They spoke grandly of requiring the kids to go to school, and the adults to learn English. I'm not sure they knew what they were getting into, but they are industrious people who will do their best to make it work.
Of course, they have no choice but to accept immigration, since they have virtually stopped having kids of their own. They know that they will soon have no way to support their social welfare system, so they are looking at immigration as a way to prop it up with more workers at the bottom.
Like the American unions of the 1970s, whose motto was "get ours, and screw the rest of you", this is an extremely short-term solution. In truth, we are seeing the last generation of "Germans" as we have known them.
And French, Brits, Dutch, Japanese...the list goes on and on. This isn't just France and Germany -- It's happening all over the world. Our most successful, highly-educated, highest achieving women have simply stopped reproducing. We are witnessing the first cultural suicide in human history.
RJM62
Touchdown! Greaser!
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2007
- Messages
- 13,157
- Location
- Upstate New York
- Display Name
Display name:
Geek on the Hill
In general I agree; but I'd also suggest that once you get to the point where there's nothing left to lose, the rules can change.
Rich
Yep, only anarchy can produce a free and peaceful society. If people don't choose it, it won't happen. Funny thing is people would choose it if it were an option. There would a brief period where "people who needed killing" got killed, and the society would settle into a pretty decent place to live governed by the basic rules of courtesy as we know them today. If God only needed to set 10 rules for mankind to live as a peaceful society, why do we have millions? If God won't violate free will, why do we think we have the right? There is a reason society is taught to fear anarchy, if we ever tried, those in power would lose power. We are controlled by fear. Rule of law is just a form of tyranny by the masses.
There is a reason society is taught to fear anarchy, if we ever tried, those in power would lose power. We are controlled by fear. Rule of law is just a form of tyranny by the masses.
Yep, only anarchy can produce a free and peaceful society. If people don't choose it, it won't happen. Funny thing is people would choose it if it were an option. There would a brief period where "people who needed killing" got killed, and the society would settle into a pretty decent place to live governed by the basic rules of courtesy as we know them today. If God only needed to set 10 rules for mankind to live as a peaceful society, why do we have millions? If God won't violate free will, why do we think we have the right?
Um, can't we just have a middle ground where we... you know have laws against murder, theft, etc, and a police force... basic law and order but not cameras on every street corner, government spying on everyone at all times, constant security checkpoints, etc?
No need to go off the deep end.
RyanShort1
Final Approach
Minus the police force - just an elected sheriff, and deputies / militia as needed.
Fearless Tower
Touchdown! Greaser!
Nothing wrong with trying, I just think that you are putting much emphasis on conscious thought in that kind of situation.
I know when I was shot at (friendly fire), I was literally in shock/disbelief for the first few seconds before I snapped out of it and went to grab the flares.
Tom-D
Taxi to Parking
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2005
- Messages
- 34,740
- Display Name
Display name:
Tom-D
yep, so they can raise bigger families and come at us with bigger numbers.
There is but 2 ways to eliminate this threat, total Annihilation or total Isolation, and we will never achieve either. simply because we don't have the spine or method to do it.
Very well said! I agree completely.
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,573
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Food isn't a solution. Don't know any of the mass killers in the past that were starving. Plenty of cultures around the world exist peacefully while in poverty. These killers are nothing more than a result of warped ideology and mental illness. Not much different than the "outcast" mass killers in the US. Nothing we can do to prevent it in the future.
JoseCuervo
En-Route
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2012
- Messages
- 2,868
- Display Name
Display name:
JoseCuervo
Phoenix
Ejection Handle Pulled
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2015
- Messages
- 583
- Display Name
Display name:
Phoenix
These things are good for job security right?
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,573
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
People who can't assimilate in a normal society.
Dav8or
Final Approach
Why do you say there is nothing we can do about it? Or, are you just saying it's not worth doing anything about it?
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,573
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Job security? I suppose if you're in an organization that tries to prevent the acts of radicals or combat them, then yes, that's job security.
You can certainly have social rules against it as society chooses, and people within society are free to enforce them as they see fit. In an anarchy situation where everyone is potentially lethally armed, and most are, then the system of social justice will tend to be immediate and on location. However anarchy eliminates 'crime' to begin with, and that provides its own benefits because much malevolence in society is created by creating crimes and criminals out of matters of free will that harm no one beyond the limits of social order. The majority of crime and violence in the U.S. revolves around the vice trades and the fact that they are illegal. Now you eliminate 30% of non accidental gun deaths in America. Wait you say, only 30% attributable to crime? Yep, 2/3rds are suicides. That is the point that is always overlooked in gun control arguments. When you look at that, the rampant illicit drug use and factor in that around a third of our society is medicated for depression or anxiety, you have to begin to question how bad our society sucks when that many people are ****ed up.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2012
- Messages
- 15,573
- Display Name
Display name:
Velocity173
Nothing to do to prevent all terrorism acts. Just saying you can prepare all you want and there will still be those who get through and accomplish their goal. Yes, it is worth trying to prevent as well.
Yes, it's really our fault because we spend money to own and fly planes instead of giving it to Muslims.
Mtns2Skies
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Messages
- 5,631
- Display Name
Display name:
Mtns2Skies
Okay I know this goes against Mari's wishes and I apologize for that. But I must echo a friend here:
"I'm so tired of seeing people who are uneducated on the issue shame Muslims in a public forum.
If a corrupt terrorist organization yelled "praise Jesus" before an attack, people wouldn't be shaming the entire Christian world for the attack and asking them to assume responsibility. Christians would say they obviously were not connected to the actual Christian community and condemn their actions.
These people don't represent what Islam is about. The Iraqi president, Sheikh of Kuwait, Qatar's foreign minister, and many others have already made statements condemning the attacks. Muslims practice peace, just like Christians, Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Taoists, etc.
Shame terrorists. Shame terrorists who falsely represent Islam. Don't shame true Muslims who have nothing to do with terror groups."
Last edited: