Slashdot Mirror
Drunken Employee Shoots Server
Target Practice writes "A drunken mortgage worker at RANLife Home Loans decided for unknown reasons to take out the company's $100,000 server with a .45-caliber automatic, blaming the damage on an imagined assailant who: mugged him, assaulted him with his own weapon, drugged him, and then broke into his office to shoot said server. According to acquaintances, he had threatened earlier that day to shoot the server and maybe himself."
Is there a sysadmin among us that hasn't, at one time or another, wanted to shoot a server?
Has anyone considered that maybe the server deserved it?
A $100,000 server? At a loan company? Damn, $100,000 is a LOT of box for a Physics department at a large university.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I think it's a holdover from the "Roaring Twenties" - I don't think any reasonable person familiar with firearms has used that term in North America, in the last twenty years. The problem is that the media professionals (either intentionally or unintentionally) use the term to describe a particular firearm, neglecting to understand the ramifications of using an archaic term. I do believe that it's more a case of laziness more than overt anti-gun alarmism; but who knows. Think Edward G. Robbinson.
If he has a CCW permit and the business he was at does not have a posted sign or policy and he was following local laws and ordinances, it's fully within his right to carry if he feels the need to. Why does it matter if he was at his desk job or anywhere else? He may live in a very bad part of town, or the business he's works at could be in a high crime area. You don't fully know the details and asking "why does he need X" is no different than asking "why does this person need privacy if he's not doing anything wrong" or any asking why anyone would be doing any activity that you yourself might not agree with or may find questionable, even if it is fully within his rights under the law.
You tread a slippery slope...
The 1911 pattern .45 ACP is still produced today and is still one of the most popular and commonly-used pistols on the market.. Not archaic, just a classic.
My blog
Hmm...make me attractive?
They are including the cost of running and maintaining Windows on it.
Times change
But ignorance does not, which is exactly what such statements prove. You seriously need to learn some extremely basic history before you respond further.
The first amendment has maintained its power exactly because the second amendment exists. The only reason the second amendment isn't first is because they wanted it understood the new country they created was built first on the pen and second on the sword; only after the pen has failed. Furthermore, they specifically granted the power to ensure a corrupt government can be overthrown.
Any gun laws which effectively prevent the potential overthrown of the government (I'm not advocating) is completely unconstitutional. Period. Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant of history or pushing an agenda. Both are extremely common. If you don't like the rights provided under the Constitution, advocate the change of the Constitution and along with it, restriction and removal of your rights. Because that's exactly what you'd be doing; or if not your rights, the rights of our children and children's children.
You need to understand, police are in now way legally obligated to save you from anything at all; assuming they are even there. Its extremely likely, whenever you actually need police, they will only be there after the need is gone. The "Protect And Serve" expression makes for great marketing but is nowhere near accurate. An accurate creed is, "Observe And Report", because that's exactly what they do. Which means, if you want protection, you must have the rights granted under the second amendment. To argue otherwise is to argue people deserve no protection from harm or injury from others.
The legitimate reasons and the specific reasons why the second amendment exists are almost endless. Every time I see someone make your statement, in my head, its always translated into, "duuh?", because you are ignorantly advocating almost everything bad humanity has to offer - and don't even realize it. Your ignorance is specifically advocating the death and injury of innocent people and even more government corruption.
Seriously. Our forefathers are extremely well documented. I encourage you to go learn about them, why specific choices were made, and why the US Constitution was written the way it was. Once you do that, you'll realize how many insanely stupid and ignorant people we have in power, including the power over your rights, privileges, freedom, and life. If you're not frustrated and at least a little bit concerned, you've not learned enough. Seriously.