This is getting out of hand. - Page 10




 
--
This is getting out of hand.
 
April 12th, 2012  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
This is getting out of hand.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BritinAfrica
It was because TV stations showed an edited version of the video of the cops beating the crap out of Rodney King and not showing King attacking a police officer, had a direct responsibility for the riots in LA that followed, especially when the jury found the policemen involved not guilty after watching the whole video. Recent studies have found by people more qualified then you or I, that the TV coverage was directly to blame for the LA riots

The riots in UK recently spread from Tottenham in London to all over the UK thanks to TV coverage. IF the riots had not been shown on TV or even reported in the press, would the riots have happened elsewhere? I don't think so.




The biggest problem with all media, TV or the press, they don't like to ruin a good story with the truth.

Before I retired I use to give firearm training, from basic up to advanced standard for security guards. One of the biggest problems I faced was people's perception of firearms thanks to Hollywood bullsh!te. Drumming that crap out of them was a nightmare, my best students without exception were women, they admitted they knew nothing and "LISTENED" to what I was telling them, blokes on the other hand "thought" they knew it all. I would tell and show someone how to hold a semi auto pistol "once" the correct way, if they held it with the weak hand on top of the strong hand, I'd let them fire it and when the slide came back and ripped a chunk out of their weak hand, my usual comment was, "Perhaps now you will listen." Nothing like pain and a bit of blood to get a point across.
A friend of mine, living in Missouri, worked many years in an ER as a nurse. She is living in a small town there, a place where everybody knew each other; suddenly one she knew was murdered. This event prompted the community to arm themselves. When something happens people react emotionally to it, not always rationally. The woman which whom was murdered was leaving her abusive husband, case closed. Hollywood is also a major factor, which influence people's attitude to weapons. I assume the majority active on this forum has experience with weapons from the military, some here have an addiction they are not the problem. Others might be, if they get proper training, not a problem. When I have seen these gun associations in the US when they are at a shooting range and fire a lot of machine guns, sub-machine guns, assault rifles, etc. They are very organized and strict. How to reduce the risk of loose canon get hold of a gun, which is the issue, not the others
April 16th, 2012  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BritinAfrica
It was because TV stations showed an edited version of the video of the cops beating the crap out of Rodney King and not showing King attacking a police officer, had a direct responsibility for the riots in LA that followed, especially when the jury found the policemen involved not guilty after watching the whole video. Recent studies have found by people more qualified then you or I, that the TV coverage was directly to blame for the LA riots

The riots in UK recently spread from Tottenham in London to all over the UK thanks to TV coverage. IF the riots had not been shown on TV or even reported in the press, would the riots have happened elsewhere? I don't think so.
So what you are saying is that we should all be kept in the dark and only feed information that keeps us passive?

The west in particular has built its societies on freedom, the right to make up our own mind and determine our own actions and originally we should then face the consequences of those actions good or bad however over successive decades the consequences side of things has been continuously watered down until they are now meaningless and for some reason people believe the answer is to censor the press when in reality the answer is to reinstate the consequences.


Quote:
The biggest problem with all media, TV or the press, they don't like to ruin a good story with the truth.

Before I retired I use to give firearm training, from basic up to advanced standard for security guards. One of the biggest problems I faced was people's perception of firearms thanks to Hollywood bullsh!te. Drumming that crap out of them was a nightmare, my best students without exception were women, they admitted they knew nothing and "LISTENED" to what I was telling them, blokes on the other hand "thought" they knew it all. I would tell and show someone how to hold a semi auto pistol "once" the correct way, if they held it with the weak hand on top of the strong hand, I'd let them fire it and when the slide came back and ripped a chunk out of their weak hand, my usual comment was, "Perhaps now you will listen." Nothing like pain and a bit of blood to get a point across.
Here is a thought should people who have difficulty in separating the reality of life and the fantasy of Hollywood be allowed to have firearms in the first place?

I am sorry but I will never believe that shooting the messenger in this case the media is a viable method to solving the problem, the media reports what it sees but it is up to us as individuals to separate fact from fiction and take responsibility for our actions, it is not the media's role to teach us common sense.

If you want to improve or change the way the media behaves stop watching, listening or reading it and I guarantee you that if enough people do that it will change to get you back but we don't do that we instead lap up idiotic stories about talentless morons who do ever more outrageous things to get you to make them famous, instead of paying those that teach us and protect us a decent wage we pay millions to some extra tall Neanderthal to bounce a ball around a court for an hour a week and worst of all we allow them to be idolised.

If you want to solve worlds problems then we as individuals need to grow up and fix the problems not ***** about the group that is making money off our stupidity.
April 16th, 2012  
BritinBritain
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
So what you are saying is that we should all be kept in the dark and only feed information that keeps us passive?
Those are your words not mine, do not try and put words into my mouth. I was answering your earlier statement below.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Originally Posted by MontyB
I don't agree, it is not the media pulling the trigger and if you and I (as well as 99.5% of the population) can watch a movie, play a video game or survive the nightly News without the need to go kill half a dozen people then it is not the media that is the problem.To blame the media is nothing short of abdicating responsibility which is one of the main symptoms of this problem.
When in fact the LA riots can be directly and has been linked to the edited version of events shown on TV screens, and what I am saying IF the Tottenham riots were not shown, the copy cat riots in other cities would not have happened. So in effect the media were the cause of the rioting that spread from Tottenham

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
The west in particular has built its societies on freedom, the right to make up our own mind and determine our own actions and originally we should then face the consequences of those actions good or bad however over successive decades the consequences side of things has been continuously watered down until they are now meaningless and for some reason people believe the answer is to censor the press when in reality the answer is to reinstate the consequences.
So its ok to have freedom of the press that tells lies and ruins lives? I fully agree with freedom of the press, only if their reporting is accurate and correct. All to often the tabloids have fabricated sensational stories which have ruined lives. Tabloids can be sued, but not many people have the money for a court case that could last years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Here is a thought should people who have difficulty in separating the reality of life and the fantasy of Hollywood be allowed to have firearms in the first place?
I don't know, should they?

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
I am sorry but I will never believe that shooting the messenger in this case the media is a viable method to solving the problem, the media reports what it sees but it is up to us as individuals to separate fact from fiction and take responsibility for our actions, it is not the media's role to teach us common sense.
No its not the media's role to teach us common sense, but it Is the media's role and responsibility to report the truth and not sensational edited versions of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
If you want to improve or change the way the media behaves stop watching, listening or reading it and I guarantee you that if enough people do that it will change to get you back but we don't do that we instead lap up idiotic stories about talentless morons who do ever more outrageous things to get you to make them famous, instead of paying those that teach us and protect us a decent wage we pay millions to some extra tall Neanderthal to bounce a ball around a court for an hour a week and worst of all we allow them to be idolised.
At least watching a extra tall Neanderthal to bounce a ball around a court for an hour a week is not fabricating, editing or inventing sensational stories that cause people to go out and riot.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
If you want to solve worlds problems then we as individuals need to grow up and fix the problems not ***** about the group that is making money off our stupidity.
They don't make money off me boet, I don't buy newspapers nor do I watch the news on TV, the media here is controlled by the ANC.
--
This is getting out of hand.
April 17th, 2012  
-- Dusty
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
Tell me do you feel like you need to carry a gun to feel safe?
I don't. I have met a few people that somehow have bigger balls now that they open carry. That scares me. How long until, just to show someone who's man enough, they draw down on someone and wound or kill them?

On the other hand, the fear the criminals have, no matter how tough they think they are, that is instilled in their eitty bitty little hearts by knowing there's a good chance the next home they break into could very well be their last does have a positive effect on the crime rate.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
I don't and oddly enough in all the time I have spent in travelling the world and living the USA I never once felt I needed to be armed to protect myself therefore if you want to solve this problem I would suggest that you don't need to change gun laws or ban anything what you need to do is change peoples perception of their environment and the need to be armed in general.
Funny. I feel threatened, more often than not, by the presence of American law enforcement than by armed criminals. BTDT.

In fact a friend of a cousin of mine lives down in Austin Texas. And not only did the ever-so-intelligent cops get the wrong address for a DD, they shot and killed his dog. "Wrong address? My bad. Let's kill the innocent man's dog as an apology."
I know some folks may not like my opinion of stuff like that when it happens, but damn, they oughta imagine how much they wouldn't like the opinions I ain't sharing!
April 17th, 2012  
LeEnfield
 
 
I remember a time when people were not so mobile and the local police knew every one on there patch. They knew the crooks and the kids with sticky fingers and they knew the people that had a problem and would deal with one way or another. These days people think nothing of flying of for a weekend to any part of the world, and the local communities are on the move much more and police spend more away from the public and missing the gossip and seeing what is happening, it's not the Police fault it is just the way things are.
April 17th, 2012  
Yossarian
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeEnfield
I remember a time when people were not so mobile and the local police knew every one on there patch. They knew the crooks and the kids with sticky fingers and they knew the people that had a problem and would deal with one way or another. These days people think nothing of flying of for a weekend to any part of the world, and the local communities are on the move much more and police spend more away from the public and missing the gossip and seeing what is happening, it's not the Police fault it is just the way things are.
Change in our society has always been a hard pill to swallow sometimes.

But I agree, in American history, during a period when everyone on America's frontiers were distrustful suspicous to strangers, a close knit, known by name basis and heavily armed town often led to almost no crime due to the fact everybody knew each other and any perp most likely would be sought out very quickly.

But being heavily armed and community focused did lead to events such as the famous Coffeyville incident.
April 17th, 2012  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yossarian
Change in our society has always been a hard pill to swallow sometimes.

But I agree, in American history, during a period when everyone on America's frontiers were distrustful suspicous to strangers, a close knit, known by name basis and heavily armed town often led to almost no crime due to the fact everybody knew each other and any perp most likely would be sought out very quickly.

But being heavily armed and community focused did lead to events such as the famous Coffeyville incident.
To change the American society is not easy, I would say almost impossible. To change the Constitution and in this case the 2nd A is more or less impossible. There are about 250-280 million firearms in the United States, the gun owners are 120-150 million (est ATF) These people have the nasty habit to vote, they must accept the change of the 2nd A. The other way to look at this, I think we can all agree, there is a problem. If we are talking about the so called "High Profile Shootings" and/or "Shooting sprees." What do we mean? According to the media every shooting is a "High Profile Shooting." However, don't bash the media so hard, they are here and they have a purpose, even if I dislike them many times, the problem is the population, not the media. Don't buy what they are saying, which is also a democratic step to take, be critical! Back to the so called shooting sprees or high profile events. I checked the statistic briefly, I couldn't detect the Columbine shooting in the statistic, until I went to down to the local level. JeffersonCounty had 13 H that year, all from Columbine, but on the state level, couldn't see it. Furthermore, I used two variables. Multiple victims/one offender and multiple victims and multiple offenders at one occasion. What statistics are good at is to indicate trends, if something is increasing or decreasing, not to explain things, it can give some hints to investigate things further. To discuss the so called shooting sprees are not even worth to discuss, it will make no statistic at all. Between 1963-2001 we had 65 high profile shootings in the US according to the definitions; the problem with the FBI is they do not separate schools, workplaces, etc. If we take these 65 shootings and the correlation between the gun owners and the amount of firearms, we will very soon realize this is a piss in the Mississippi
April 18th, 2012  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
To change the American society is not easy, I would say almost impossible. To change the Constitution and in this case the 2nd A is more or less impossible. There are about 250-280 million firearms in the United States, the gun owners are 120-150 million (est ATF) These people have the nasty habit to vote, they must accept the change of the 2nd A. The other way to look at this, I think we can all agree, there is a problem. If we are talking about the so called "High Profile Shootings" and/or "Shooting sprees." What do we mean? According to the media every shooting is a "High Profile Shooting." However, don't bash the media so hard, they are here and they have a purpose, even if I dislike them many times, the problem is the population, not the media. Don't buy what they are saying, which is also a democratic step to take, be critical! Back to the so called shooting sprees or high profile events. I checked the statistic briefly, I couldn't detect the Columbine shooting in the statistic, until I went to down to the local level. JeffersonCounty had 13 H that year, all from Columbine, but on the state level, couldn't see it. Furthermore, I used two variables. Multiple victims/one offender and multiple victims and multiple offenders at one occasion. What statistics are good at is to indicate trends, if something is increasing or decreasing, not to explain things, it can give some hints to investigate things further. To discuss the so called shooting sprees are not even worth to discuss, it will make no statistic at all. Between 1963-2001 we had 65 high profile shootings in the US according to the definitions; the problem with the FBI is they do not separate schools, workplaces, etc. If we take these 65 shootings and the correlation between the gun owners and the amount of firearms, we will very soon realize this is a piss in the Mississippi
I am sure the NRA would love to use that argument but here is the problem, on a per capita analysis (which is the only feasible way of doing a comparison) the USA still leads the developed world in firearms related deaths and that includes school shootings or mass shootings in general by a very large margin.

As for whether societies can change I think you are being rather negative as societies change on a constant basis you just have to look at peoples attitudes to smoking and drink driving over the past 30 years to see how much they have changed.
April 19th, 2012  
I3BrigPvSk
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyB
I am sure the NRA would love to use that argument but here is the problem, on a per capita analysis (which is the only feasible way of doing a comparison) the USA still leads the developed world in firearms related deaths and that includes school shootings or mass shootings in general by a very large margin.

As for whether societies can change I think you are being rather negative as societies change on a constant basis you just have to look at peoples attitudes to smoking and drink driving over the past 30 years to see how much they have changed.
They might do, I am not certain about that and who cares if they agree or not. If we are talking about the firearms in the US and the violent crimes, you and I can agree they have a problem. But what we call the shooting sprees, leave that. A lot of attention, not so much in the reality, they disappear in the clutter. I might be negative as you put it. It is a huge difference between to change the oldest active Constitution and to change peoples attitude. To make these entire firearms owner to change their perception? Not easy, But we need to consider; the 2nd A is not for all, we need to include health issues to it as well. We can not touch the 2nd A so we need to limit the access to firearms for a limited few. You used the reference to DUI, then we blame the driver, not the car. Violent crimes, we blame the guns, not the user. We shall discuss the whole violent crimes in the US, not the so called "High Profile Shooting." They are so rare so even if a person has more than five minutes of experience of statistic will realize it is not worth it
April 19th, 2012  
MontyB
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by I3BrigPvSk
You used the reference to DUI, then we blame the driver, not the car. Violent crimes, we blame the guns, not the user.
Very true however we do blame the shooter and we license drivers so they know their responsibilities therefore there is no reason to blame the car (it being an inanimate also helps there).
 


Similar Topics
Shiites, Sunnis should work hand in hand
Hand Grenade
Driver Identification
Favorite hand to hand combat scene(s)
Who are the best hand to hand combat warriors in the world?