There is no indication whatsoever that the 43 year old was hitting or beating the older man, or was threatening to hit or beat him.
The wife of the texter was shot through the hand. She was holding her husband back, indicating that he was trying to physically engage the shooter, othewise, why bother to hold him back?
The "physical fight" was the wife assaulting the texter to restrain him as he indicated a willingness to fight. The wife was shot in the hand, holding him back. That indicates that the texter died trying to assault someone else, who, being an old man, may have been legitimately in fear of his life. At least more than Zimmerman was. And Zimmerman argued (And won) that following someone you believe to be dangerous is OK, and in no way changes the right to respond to a threat with deadly force.
The report I read he didn't retreive a firearm, but instead asked the management to enforce their written theater policy. They refused, and someone died. I hope the theater is sued for billions.
So you want to train everyone to do what violent pricks tell them to do? The shooter went to the manager to report an incident and ask for help dealing with it. The manager refused to enforce written theater policy. I hope the theater is sued for billions. When the shooter returned to his seat to watch the movie, the texter attacked him with projectiles. The shooter returned the favor. The texter started the fight. The texter was the one that caused the scene. And you want to reward them for violently breaching the theater rules by having everyone in the theater apologize to him for asking him to be polite?
WTF, can't the texters learn some politeness and personal responsibility?
The report from the witness I saw indicated that the draw and firing was quick, and he was already restraining her husband prior to the shot. He was held back by his wife, and threw popcorn at the shooter. If she wasn't holding him back, he likely would have been throwing punches (so indicates the shooter), so the shooter held a belief that he was subject to a violent attack with the capability of ending his life. So he ended the confrontation.
If this doesn't end in an acquittal, I hope the Blacks burn Florida to the ground. This shooting was more justified than "that other shooting".
"After the lights went down" is "during the movie" to most. Next, you'll argue that opening credits aren't the movie, or closing credits. Or times when there is no action or dialogue.
He was texting his employee after the lights were turned down. He was asked to stop, and he reacted violently. When you assault someone, what should you expect to have happen? Rule #1, don't bring popcorn to a gunfight.
I've watched the previews before while someone ahead of me is texting - you look UP to see the movie, DOWN to see the phone in the row ahead of you.
You should see a doctor about your advanced tunnel vision. I can see about 210 degrees front FOV, and certainly more than enough to be focused on the UP screen and still see the DOWN cell phone.
I can't believe how many posts are applauding this - a man is dead.
What do I care? Some person who was unknown to me died. That happens hundreds of times a day. If I cried for every dead person I'd never heard of, I'd die, then who would cry for me? Instead, it's a teaching moment. Be polite, you never know who's armed. Hopefully some good will come out of this. The texters and other rude people will be slightly more nice, in case the person they are pissing off shoots them.
Really, the best outcome is if the theater is sued by someone for billions. The official policy is that phones aren't allowed. But, by ignoring their own policy (the indications are now that he complained and was told that they don't enforce their policy), the theater killed a man. Had they enforced their written policy, no death would have occurred. If they are held responsible, then the theaters will revise their policies, and enforce them. That would be nice. I've been annoyed more than once by people violating the written rules, and the theater, in all cases, refused to enforce their written policies. If you aren't going to enforce them, don't make them policy, make them "etiquette" or something.
Murderer? The shooter was assaulted with popcorn, so defended himself with a popcorn-sized piece of lead. Isn't it justifieable to defend yourself when assaulted?
If you don't know the answer, knowing you don't know it is a time management strategy. Wasting time on a question you don't know, and can't deduce the answer to is poor time management. When you've answered every question to the best of your ability, there's no reason to continue to second-guess yourself (and in fact, it's been shown that your first impression is often more right than a second look).
When you don't know the dates of the US Civil War, how can you compare the plight of the slaves in the US to the Serfs in Russia? Knowing the order of the freeing of the slaves world-wide makes a huge difference in understanding. Much like some people blame Sufferage for Prohibition. How can you evaluate that if you don't know which came first? Yes, memorizing the date of Little Big Horn isn't necessarily useful, but putting seemingly unrelated things into chronological order is an important skill that relies on memorization.
If any schools are discouraging parental participation that is wrong and should be stopped.
When the participation is micro-management of curriculum the school doesn't even have control over, what would you have the school do? Encourage the parents to visit the school and take up instruction time voicing their opinions on the state-set plans?
Depends on the test. I never skim tests. They could tell you the structure and breakdown of questions, but not the difficulty of them. If you are reading to that level, it's no longer a "skim" and you could just answer the question. So know the layout before you start. Most testgivers will tell you the number of each type of question long before the test, so you can prepare.
Rarely have I run out of time in a test. I'm usually first done. That doesn't correlate with score (I'm first done and usually do well, but I'll also be first done with a C or worse - if you don't know it, staring at it won't help).
Knowing what you don't know is the best thing for me. "I think it's 7, if it's not 7, then I don't know what it is or how to find an alternate answer" then pick 7, move on, and don't come back.
Elimination as an answering tool for multiple choice isn't a time management tool.
And every person on the planet could be the best basketball player on the planet, if only they trained harder/practiced more.
Some traits are influenced by genetics (intrinsic). The studies have shown correlations that indicate this is true with intelligence (though also influenced by environment as well).
The best advice at this point is probably to put off study for another 5 years, and in that time, find an intelligent hobby. If he wants better math skills, take up sudoko or cards. If he wants better language/reading skills, read more (fiction, non fiction doesn't really matter). Do things that exercise the parts of the brain they want to focus on.
I could *never* be a world-class basketball player, but I could be better than I am now.
Guns are deadly force. You don't pull the trigger unless you intend to kill the other person (disable is the official term, but a dead person is disabled). You are never taught to aim for anything other than central body mass.
Ushers are not security. The usher should have been running from the confrontation, to notify the manager and police, not stepping in and getting shot like the victim's wife.
Man with gun goes to theater. Man with gun is assaulted (with popcorn). Man with gun defends himself.
Isn't this the gun-nut's dream? Everyone armed? So an annoying guy texting ends in a homicide? Where's the problem again?
Those loans were unrelated to the problem. If none of those loans had been made, the crisis would still have happened. The cause was the banker fraud when reselling loans, and amplification of risk to increase returns. Any slowdown would have caused the same result.
Also, since they are not common carriers, the ISPs should be sued if they deliver child porn. When they fight so hard to not be common carriers, we should make sure they feel the brunt of that choice. Got harassed by someone online? Sue the company that delivered the harassement. If they were a common carrier, they'd be blameless. They fought long and hard to not be a common carrier, so they should feel the sting of their choice.
The idea that democracy is a good thing is a lie spread by the sort of people who can effectively persuade large masses of people, with the help of those who have been so persuaded.
Yeah, those manipulative fascists like Franklin and Adams.
That's the only thing the public/private duopoly does right. Private is optimized for high acheivers. Public is optimized for the middle 70% (based on federal law requirements), with attention on the lower 15%. The top 15% are completely abandoned by NCLB and other federal initiatives. Anyone below the largest group is "special-ed" in old speak. Not sure what they are being called now.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no indication whatsoever that the 43 year old was hitting or beating the older man, or was threatening to hit or beat him.
The wife of the texter was shot through the hand. She was holding her husband back, indicating that he was trying to physically engage the shooter, othewise, why bother to hold him back?
The "physical fight" was the wife assaulting the texter to restrain him as he indicated a willingness to fight. The wife was shot in the hand, holding him back. That indicates that the texter died trying to assault someone else, who, being an old man, may have been legitimately in fear of his life. At least more than Zimmerman was. And Zimmerman argued (And won) that following someone you believe to be dangerous is OK, and in no way changes the right to respond to a threat with deadly force.
The report I read he didn't retreive a firearm, but instead asked the management to enforce their written theater policy. They refused, and someone died. I hope the theater is sued for billions.
So you want to train everyone to do what violent pricks tell them to do? The shooter went to the manager to report an incident and ask for help dealing with it. The manager refused to enforce written theater policy. I hope the theater is sued for billions. When the shooter returned to his seat to watch the movie, the texter attacked him with projectiles. The shooter returned the favor. The texter started the fight. The texter was the one that caused the scene. And you want to reward them for violently breaching the theater rules by having everyone in the theater apologize to him for asking him to be polite?
WTF, can't the texters learn some politeness and personal responsibility?
The report from the witness I saw indicated that the draw and firing was quick, and he was already restraining her husband prior to the shot. He was held back by his wife, and threw popcorn at the shooter. If she wasn't holding him back, he likely would have been throwing punches (so indicates the shooter), so the shooter held a belief that he was subject to a violent attack with the capability of ending his life. So he ended the confrontation.
If this doesn't end in an acquittal, I hope the Blacks burn Florida to the ground. This shooting was more justified than "that other shooting".
"After the lights went down" is "during the movie" to most. Next, you'll argue that opening credits aren't the movie, or closing credits. Or times when there is no action or dialogue.
When you remove "beating their wives" from the list, are cops still more likely to commit crimes?
I've watched the previews before while someone ahead of me is texting - you look UP to see the movie, DOWN to see the phone in the row ahead of you.
You should see a doctor about your advanced tunnel vision. I can see about 210 degrees front FOV, and certainly more than enough to be focused on the UP screen and still see the DOWN cell phone.
I can't believe how many posts are applauding this - a man is dead.
What do I care? Some person who was unknown to me died. That happens hundreds of times a day. If I cried for every dead person I'd never heard of, I'd die, then who would cry for me? Instead, it's a teaching moment. Be polite, you never know who's armed. Hopefully some good will come out of this. The texters and other rude people will be slightly more nice, in case the person they are pissing off shoots them.
Really, the best outcome is if the theater is sued by someone for billions. The official policy is that phones aren't allowed. But, by ignoring their own policy (the indications are now that he complained and was told that they don't enforce their policy), the theater killed a man. Had they enforced their written policy, no death would have occurred. If they are held responsible, then the theaters will revise their policies, and enforce them. That would be nice. I've been annoyed more than once by people violating the written rules, and the theater, in all cases, refused to enforce their written policies. If you aren't going to enforce them, don't make them policy, make them "etiquette" or something.
Murderer? The shooter was assaulted with popcorn, so defended himself with a popcorn-sized piece of lead. Isn't it justifieable to defend yourself when assaulted?
I don't pay for credit card usage. I get paid to use my credit cards. You aren't very smart if you are paying a bank to use a credit card.
If you don't know the answer, knowing you don't know it is a time management strategy. Wasting time on a question you don't know, and can't deduce the answer to is poor time management. When you've answered every question to the best of your ability, there's no reason to continue to second-guess yourself (and in fact, it's been shown that your first impression is often more right than a second look).
No. That he can never be at the top of his field is proof that the GP (skids) was wrong. You are just agreeing with me in a most disagreeable manner.
When you don't know the dates of the US Civil War, how can you compare the plight of the slaves in the US to the Serfs in Russia? Knowing the order of the freeing of the slaves world-wide makes a huge difference in understanding. Much like some people blame Sufferage for Prohibition. How can you evaluate that if you don't know which came first? Yes, memorizing the date of Little Big Horn isn't necessarily useful, but putting seemingly unrelated things into chronological order is an important skill that relies on memorization.
So you don't know what 7*8 is, but are "above average" in math? That may say more about your peers than you.
If any schools are discouraging parental participation that is wrong and should be stopped.
When the participation is micro-management of curriculum the school doesn't even have control over, what would you have the school do? Encourage the parents to visit the school and take up instruction time voicing their opinions on the state-set plans?
Depends on the test. I never skim tests. They could tell you the structure and breakdown of questions, but not the difficulty of them. If you are reading to that level, it's no longer a "skim" and you could just answer the question. So know the layout before you start. Most testgivers will tell you the number of each type of question long before the test, so you can prepare.
Rarely have I run out of time in a test. I'm usually first done. That doesn't correlate with score (I'm first done and usually do well, but I'll also be first done with a C or worse - if you don't know it, staring at it won't help).
Knowing what you don't know is the best thing for me. "I think it's 7, if it's not 7, then I don't know what it is or how to find an alternate answer" then pick 7, move on, and don't come back.
Elimination as an answering tool for multiple choice isn't a time management tool.
And every person on the planet could be the best basketball player on the planet, if only they trained harder/practiced more.
Some traits are influenced by genetics (intrinsic). The studies have shown correlations that indicate this is true with intelligence (though also influenced by environment as well).
The best advice at this point is probably to put off study for another 5 years, and in that time, find an intelligent hobby. If he wants better math skills, take up sudoko or cards. If he wants better language/reading skills, read more (fiction, non fiction doesn't really matter). Do things that exercise the parts of the brain they want to focus on.
I could *never* be a world-class basketball player, but I could be better than I am now.
Guns are deadly force. You don't pull the trigger unless you intend to kill the other person (disable is the official term, but a dead person is disabled). You are never taught to aim for anything other than central body mass.
Ushers are not security. The usher should have been running from the confrontation, to notify the manager and police, not stepping in and getting shot like the victim's wife.
Man with gun goes to theater. Man with gun is assaulted (with popcorn). Man with gun defends himself.
Isn't this the gun-nut's dream? Everyone armed? So an annoying guy texting ends in a homicide? Where's the problem again?
So the court decision made by mostly Bush appointees is Obama's fault?
Those loans were unrelated to the problem. If none of those loans had been made, the crisis would still have happened. The cause was the banker fraud when reselling loans, and amplification of risk to increase returns. Any slowdown would have caused the same result.
Also, since they are not common carriers, the ISPs should be sued if they deliver child porn. When they fight so hard to not be common carriers, we should make sure they feel the brunt of that choice. Got harassed by someone online? Sue the company that delivered the harassement. If they were a common carrier, they'd be blameless. They fought long and hard to not be a common carrier, so they should feel the sting of their choice.
Sure, or make a garden in your backyard to feed yourself and your neighbors.
The idea that democracy is a good thing is a lie spread by the sort of people who can effectively persuade large masses of people, with the help of those who have been so persuaded.
Yeah, those manipulative fascists like Franklin and Adams.
That's the only thing the public/private duopoly does right. Private is optimized for high acheivers. Public is optimized for the middle 70% (based on federal law requirements), with attention on the lower 15%. The top 15% are completely abandoned by NCLB and other federal initiatives. Anyone below the largest group is "special-ed" in old speak. Not sure what they are being called now.
Nano condom, sounds like a description of the size you buy in the stores.