Slashdot Mirror

You don't need a gun at your nightstand, it's never going to be a matter of seconds that saves you.

You do realize that when you make a statement like that, it takes only a single counterexample to prove you wrong?

Like this: The mother tells 7 Action News she "didn't have time to get scared." When she heard the door to her home on Woodrow Wilson being kicked in, she immediately warned the three teenage intruders and then opened fire.

Or this: "Apparently the homeowner has been the victim of burglary recently so he was on alert, he was on edge, and as soon as he heard glass breaking he armed himself to protect himself and his 11-year-old child who was in the home."

Or this: "Police said Henry broke into the house and began to attack Moreno until her daughter, Jayda Milsap, 11, shot Henry twice with a handgun." Now there's a story about kids and guns you probably didn't see on the news. If this mom had kept her gun locked so her daughter couldn't get to it, they both might be dead now.

So I'm sorry to inform you of this, but when it comes to violent crime the world does not work the way you think that it does. When an armed person is suddenly and without prior warning in your home, you are in a combat situation. And in a combat situation, seconds matter.

Whether the risk of being prepared for such a situation does or does not outweigh the risks of having an unlocked gun around depends on your risk of home invasion, who lives in the house, who visits the house, and so on. A universal assessment is impossible. But in making the choice you need to be aware that there is a tremendous selection bias in the stories that are covered in the media: defensive firearms use does not receive nearly the coverage that the accidental shooting of a kid does, but is orders of magnitude more common.

You have to remember Dealers pay to play and they have contracts with auto makers on what kinds of service they'll perform under warranty and that the manufacturers will always support their interests. It's expensive when an auto maker has to change things in the field but it's a revenue stream for dealerships who charge all of the labor hours + service fees right back to the manufacturers but it's symbiotic and they both milk the customer either coming or going.

Remember when Chrysler and GM went bankrupt and all those dealers were screaming because their dealerships were terminated due to Chapter 11 reorganization? It was a cost saving measure for GM and Chrysler disguised as the argument that fewer dealers meant less competition within their own lines of vehicles.

Bringing the car into the dealership means much more than just fixing a software glitch, it also means the ability to upsell you on their expensive bullshit that you can get from Midas or an independent for far less. Not to mention while you're waiting you can see the new models that are out, you know the ones that don't have all the problems your current vehicle has. That means it's ultimately in their best interests to keep you coming to them when you need your headlight grease changed. Think that's unrealistic? Manufacturers are putting more and more components into cars that independent service people can't repair just to keep the symbiotic relationship going.

Tesla can't do that because they don't have dealers so pushing changes makes sense for them but now I'll suspect that some hacker network in Eastern Europe will be trying to figure this out so Telsas can be used as WMDs.

So then I hunted for "dui+sting" on your friendly neighborhood search engines and got:
.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/man-claims-dui-sting-child-custody-dispute-wife/story?id=14207264
.
http://www.harriscountydivorceattorneys.com/2011/08/man-blames-wife-for-plotting-dui-to-benefit-from-divorce.shtml

Zimmerman, and yourself, put yourselves in situations where you may have a confrontation with people--this is the reality of a neighborhood watch. He did not break the law by carrying a weapon and had done so previously while on the watch, a point that reinforces his position. Whether or not you agree is irrelevant.

This is not a homicide. "Homicide" is a legal term that indicates that another person was illegally killed by another. This has yet to be determined, just as you state.

There was a complete investigation and it was determined that Zimmerman was in accordance with the law. He was only brought in after the press and politicians got ahold of the case. Where are you reading that a full investigation was not completed? I am curious to see your sources.

Any investigation will have one person saying something and that is bounced off the other person, if either chooses to speak. Unfortunately, the victim is deceased. As it stands, much more than words are being put in Zimmerman's mouth by the press that he ever put in Martin's mouth, to include flat out lies, manipulated pictures and creative editing.

If you strive for justice/fairness, defend the inadequacies on both sides, not just one.

Here is another case, just happened: http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/19859545/2012/10/18/neighbors-altercation-ends-with-one-shot-and-killed

How much traction do you think this will get in the MSM?

Er, in case YOU missed it:

Neighbor saw bandages, swollen nose
ABC News doctors Zimmerman video to peddle false story in Trayvon Martin case

I notice that the YouTube video has been rather rapidly taken down. Here's a linky to the story, with a working link to video (at least it worked around 5:15 Central Time) ... :: http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/national/screaming-toddlers-airport-patdown-111710 This is just fucking ridiculous ... THIS is what "security" has come to?? Well, welcome to the 4th fucking Reich; a Corporate Republic. I don't even fly, and this whole thing is REALLY starting to piss me off!!!! I'm gonna stop ranting now, I'm pretty irritated.

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/dpp/news/local/pinellas/pedestrian-fatally-hit-by-bike-rider-070510

This was just the first link in google when I searched for "bicycle fatally hits pedestrian" -- I'm sure there are many more.

That would be funny only if you haven't read Man says he's eaten 23,000 big macs

To be fair, this incident was a LOCAL station and not Fox News Channel. However, the station is owned by Fox and not an affiliate.
They were a CBS station before some purchases had affiliations jumping around all over the dial IIRC, and part of the news cast remains. They do have a decidely biased slant on their reporting and some really asinine op ed pieces, but then again they also have a pretty damn good weather department and "Skytower HD Viper" which is nice here in Florida I suppose.
The Corporation also had a bit about this incident and along with the decidely smug segment that aired during the news broadcast about the "victory" in court. Of course, there was no mention of any sort of lying or attempt at altering the original piece, but that's pretty much to be expected.