Barren, do you actually think anyone here, other than a few other racists, want you to compliment them on their eloquence?
Guilty or Innocent?
- Thread starter ReighnStorm
- Start date
dr. cello said:
The media isn't powerful. People are just weak and will believe anything thrown their way.
My point was that the media only has the power that people give it, weak people, who were taught from an early age to believe in god, to believe their politicians are respectable, to believe the media is fair, balanced and objective, to believe that their "country" is superior to all others, etc., etc.
Either she's guilty or her husband is pretty stupid.
Just how does a gun go off and with high odds, hit him in the head? How was she handing him the gun? Did the gun have the hammer already cocked so when we slipped, it easily went off? If so, what the hell was it doing cocked? If not cocked, was she handing him the gun with the grip held and her finger on the trigger so she accidentally pulled it while slipping? And also if so, why the hell wasn't the safety on as well?
With her husband being a police officer, he should know about gun safety so I doubt it was his fault. Not only that, but many people also teach their spouses and even kids about gun safety so she should have known how to properly hand him his gun so those accidents won't happen. If I never taught someone how to handle a gun properly, no way in hell would I ask them to hand it to me.
My guess? She's guilty.
- N
Just how does a gun go off and with high odds, hit him in the head? How was she handing him the gun? Did the gun have the hammer already cocked so when we slipped, it easily went off? If so, what the hell was it doing cocked? If not cocked, was she handing him the gun with the grip held and her finger on the trigger so she accidentally pulled it while slipping? And also if so, why the hell wasn't the safety on as well?
With her husband being a police officer, he should know about gun safety so I doubt it was his fault. Not only that, but many people also teach their spouses and even kids about gun safety so she should have known how to properly hand him his gun so those accidents won't happen. If I never taught someone how to handle a gun properly, no way in hell would I ask them to hand it to me.
My guess? She's guilty.
- N
Neildo said:
well, even if the odds are one in a gazillion, there's always that ONE, right?
Neildo said:
Don't know much about guns, do you? Have you ever heard of double-action revolvers ...the ones where you just pull the trigger ...ones where you odn't have to cock it first? I think they were invented in the 1800s! ...LOL!
And, just so you know, some of the newer semi-automatics don't even have "hammers" ...they're ready to shoot all the time if a round is in the chamber (there are usually three safeties).
Neildo said:
One is not always in conscious control of there muscles during a fall. It's also pretty natural to hold a gun in the "normal" way ...that's the way the things are made!
Neildo said:
My guess is that until you learn a little more about guns and handling guns, you should let the experts "guess" about this event instead of making wild-assed assumptions about which you know little or nothing.
Baron Max
Baron Max said:
Thank you.
Cottontop3000 said:
Trying to tell others what they should do and think only shows that you are a jelous sort yourself.
dr. cello said:
I think you are wrong for look at the riots in LA California that the Rodney King case started when the news only showed one side of that case.
The so called media is only as powerful as you let it become!
reighn: why is it only the so called media? is it not actually 'a means of mass communication, such as newpapers, magazines, radio, or television,' or 'the group of journalists and others who constitute the communications industry and profession?' but yes, it's only as powerful as people let it be. and people let it be very powerful.
cosmic: they aren't doing that actively at the moment. my point is mostly this: when the media covers something, public awareness of that subject will rise. let's pretend they're covering environmentalism. the masses start to care about it. then, one week, the media decides that they are tired of covering environmentalism, and switch over to covering how truly exciting i am to talk to. almost immediately, or in a very short time, environmentalism's public interest drops, and i become fascinating. the media could use this extensively, but they don't. not yet, anyway.
cosmic: they aren't doing that actively at the moment. my point is mostly this: when the media covers something, public awareness of that subject will rise. let's pretend they're covering environmentalism. the masses start to care about it. then, one week, the media decides that they are tired of covering environmentalism, and switch over to covering how truly exciting i am to talk to. almost immediately, or in a very short time, environmentalism's public interest drops, and i become fascinating. the media could use this extensively, but they don't. not yet, anyway.
Public awareness of that subject will rise but the publics value and thought on that subject is not important to the media. They make us self aware of what they want us to be aware of and that's not true value of your public. Giving all information equally and letting the public decide which is most important to them is whats fair and just but does not happen. It's the mass destruction of complete communication! The so called media is.
i'm still trying to figure out why it is not, in fact, the media, but only so-called. it fits the definition perfectly. and do you know why? because the definition was created ex post facto, to describe what the media is. so stop trying to sound like you're smarter than they are. you come off as something of a git.
public awareness rises, and public thought changes. don't fool yourself. if the media wants the people to think one way, they will make it happen. it's not difficult. the people at large are wilful slaves.
public awareness rises, and public thought changes. don't fool yourself. if the media wants the people to think one way, they will make it happen. it's not difficult. the people at large are wilful slaves.
ReighnStorm said:
First, ...how do you know, what makes you think, that it's not important to them?
But, second, I disagree with your statement ...they care a LOT! If nothing more than selling more advertising if they can keep the public "aroused" about some topic/subject and coming back for more of their bullshit!
ReighnStorm said:
I agree that it does NOT happen! And by that very statement, it seems to me that you should be able to see that the news media has tremendous powers of persuasion .....and if used wrongly, can result in horrendous consequences! Hitler used the media (radio) as a means of directing the thoughts and feelings of the German people ....please don't think that it can't and doesn't happen today! The media is a powerful force and, as I see it, has no reins for which to control it.
Baron Max
ReighnStorm said:
Perhaps you should change that statement to something like:
"The so called media is only as powerful as the people let it become!"
And just so you understand ...have you ever heard of "mob rule" or "mob justice" or "mob vengence"? ...and don't you think that a few select words can change the whole dynamic of that mob?
Baron Max
If you're still trying to figure that out then you are an idiot! Words created by man holds no true meaning.
No, that means that the people are weak and can't think for themselves! Just look at the majority of the population.
Last edited:
Because its been proven all through history. Look at the Hurricane Katrina coverage.
Only to weak people Baron Max. Only to the weak does that happen. But considering the kind of people populating the world then I better understand the so called medias hold!
ReighnStorm said:
very well then. stop communicating with anyone. every word that you have ever used or will ever use, is created by man. language is created by man. it is a man-made construct. study linguistics sometime. english was created by man. it's a germanic language. it's not even based directly in Latin. it borrows heavily from other languages. all of which are man-made. if words hold no true meaning then i suggest you stop using them, because clearly you aren't ever going to get your point across--because your point needs words, and you, my friend, do not believe that words mean anything. or at least start prepending 'so called' to everything you talk about.
but wait. you just want to call it 'the so called media' because you are the type of person who uses the word 'edgy'. you believe that your mindless scepticism is cool, and that you seem intelligent by denying that the media is called the media. i suppose you don't call people by their names? because their names are just contrived. your given name has less meaning than the word 'media' does, as like as not. and of course you can't call people by their screen names--that's even worse. mine, for instance? i've never played the cello. it comes from cellish, which comes from cel, which comes from celchu, which, in turn, is a mike stackpole character, the name of which i used a long, long time ago. it is without meaning.
or even better--stop being a pretentious git and take one more step on the road to being a useful human being.
yes, and? the people have power, yes. and they have surrendered it. they do not, speaking practically, have power anymore. they listen to the media because it does their thinking for them. the people wilfully submit to slavery and surrender their power. i don't think you understand me, but that's okay--talk to someone with two brain cells to rub together and maybe they'll explain it in nice, simple words you can understand.
you cite hurricane katrina coverage. let me tell you a little something. harvey danger and death cab for cutie had a katrina benefit concert--and it sold out almost immediately. other shows for both bands are being held, and they have not. the people care about katrina. most of them only care from their armchairs, but there is a significant amount of money being generated from fundraisers. a piece of art from penny-arcade sold for more than 8000 dollars for a katrina benefit. somethingawful.com raised over twenty thousand dollars via paypal. who doesn't care, now? i've seen more katrina benefits than i ever saw for 9/11.
the media wants the public to have an opinion, because the media has an opinion. and the media wants the public to have an opinion because opinion generates controversy, and controversy is beneficial to the news. people like conflict, problems, controversy. the media, therefore, likes conflict, problems, controversy.
Uh, I own quite a few guns, thank-you-very-much. Not all the ones I wish I could own though thanks to the lame AWB laws in California. Thanks for your ASSumptions.
The article had no mention of the type of gun that was used in this incident so I was merely trying to think of the various ways in which the gun, whatever type it may have been, could have discharged a bullet if it were indeed an "accident" and not her fault from slipping on a book.
What, did her muscles also involuntarily turn the safety off too before falling and pulling the trigger? Considering her husband is a police officer and her most likely knowing a thing or two about guns, it should have been on. I'm still curious how she was holding the gun while handing it to him. When she slipped, she would have been better off just dropping the gun rather than still holding onto it gripped with her finger on the trigger, unless the gun had a hammer that somehow got snagged on clothing or something. The article doesn't mention how the bullet went off so I'm trying to think of all the various possible ways it could have.
And hey, like I said, it's a GUESS that she's guilty. Firearms just don't magically go off on their own and when they do, the odds are a million to one that it happens in a situation such as this. But anyways, it's nice to see you didn't put much speculative thought into this incident rather than just resorting to the same ol' unconstructive criticisms towards others posts.
- N