Page 219 of 323

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:28 pm
by Seacoaster(1)
When are the guys who think Biden is diminished going to talk about their Orange Hero??

https://www.statnews.com/2024/08/07/tru ... perts-say/

"In a speech earlier this year, former President Trump was mocking President Biden’s ability to walk through sand when he suddenly switched to talking about the old Hollywood icon Cary Grant.

“Somebody said he [Biden] looks great in a bathing suit, right? When he was in the sand and he was having a hard time lifting his feet through the sand, because you know, sand is heavy. They figure three solid ounces per foot. But sand is a little heavy. And he’s sitting in a bathing suit. Look, at 81, do you remember Cary Grant? How good was Cary Grant, right? I don’t think Cary Grant — he was good. I don’t know what happened to movie stars today,” he said at a March rally in Georgia. Trump went on to talk about contemporary actors, Michael Jackson, and border policies before returning to the theme of how Biden looks on the beach.

This shifting from topic to topic, with few connections — a pattern of speech called tangentiality — is one of several disjointed and occasionally incoherent verbal habits that seem to have increased in Trump’s speech in recent years, according to interviews with experts in memory, psychology, and linguistics.

Back in 2017, Trump’s first year in the White House, a STAT analysis showed Trump’s speaking style had deteriorated since the 1980s. Seven years on, now that Trump has the GOP presidential nomination, STAT has repeated the analysis. The experts noted a further reduction in Trump’s linguistic complexity and, while none said they could give a diagnosis without an examination, some said certain shifts in his speaking style are potential indications of cognitive decline.

Both Trump’s and Biden’s cognitive abilities have received extensive public scrutiny in an election initially involving two men of retirement age, though concerns about Biden’s mental competence have faded since he announced he wouldn’t be seeking re-election.

Trump has often said that he’s taken and passed an unspecified cognitive test. Last week, speaking to the National Association of Black Journalists, he said, “I want anybody running for president to take an aptitude test, to take a cognitive test. I think it’s a great idea. And I took two of them, and I aced them.” The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment on this story.

Related: Physicians weigh in on potential impact of Trump’s ear wound: ‘It’s a matter of inches’
Questions about Trump’s memory are typically raised when he makes a glaring verbal slip, such as mistaking names. Among the most publicized examples in recent months were when the 78-year-old confused former president Obama and Biden, and spoke about Nikki Haley when he meant to refer to Nancy Pelosi. Yet for all the attention they drew, experts in aging and cognition said those errors were relatively insignificant.

“Everyone to some degree has some level of mixing up of names,” said Ben Michaelis, a clinical psychologist who has carried out cognitive assessments for the New York Supreme Court. “It’s a bit of a red herring.” Zenzi Griffin, a psychology professor at the University of Texas at Austin agreed, noting the phonetic similarities between “Nikki Haley” and “Nancy Pelosi” (both names start with “N” and both their first and last names end with an “ee” sound.) “That level of similarity really makes it an easy error to make,” she said.

Other verbal shifts are more telling. At STAT’s request, four experts reviewed four clips of Trump’s speeches in recent months, and compared them to speeches from 2017. Several noticed Trump’s 2024 speeches included more short sentences, confused word order, and repetition, alongside extended digressions such as Trump’s comments on Biden and Cary Grant, or in another speech, comments on banking abruptly giving way to Trump lamenting the cost of electric cars.

These could be attributed to a variety of possible causes, they said, some benign and others more worrisome. They include mood changes, a desire to appeal to certain audiences, natural aging, or the beginnings of a cognitive condition like Alzheimer’s disease.
...

Another clear trend from his analysis showed that, since 2020, Trump has increasingly spoken about the past, with around a 44% increase in past-focused sentences, and is spending very little time talking about the future. This is particularly striking, said Pennebaker, given that presidential candidates are typically forward-looking and making promises about what they will deliver. It’s something that Vice President Kamala Harris picked up on in her first campaign speech, in which she criticized Trump’s vision as being “focused on the past.”

Even as Trump speaks with more derailments, Pennebaker found that he’s relied on unusually simple words and sentence structures since before he was elected president. A linguistic metric of analytic thinking shows that Trump’s levels of complexity have always been unmistakably low, said Pennebaker. Whereas most presidential candidates are in the 60 to 70 range, Trump’s speeches range from 10 to 24. “I can’t tell you how staggering this is,” said Pennebaker. “He does not think in a complex way at all.”

Michaelis, who also reviewed Trump’s speaking style for STAT in 2017 and showed how it had become significantly less sophisticated over the decades, said the most important change in the past seven years is Trump’s increasing digressions and speeches that don’t stay on topic, which he explained can be an indication of diminished cognitive ability. “Tangentiality certainly amped up and it’s difficult to follow him,” Michaelis said. “You’d expect some cognitive diminishment of course, he’s 78 years old — if he was your grandfather you wouldn’t expect anything different. He just happens to be running for president.”

Although Michaelis said he couldn’t offer a formal diagnosis, he said Trump’s speaking style was cause for concern. “There’s reasonable evidence suggestive of forms of dementia,” he said. “The reduction in complexity of sentences and vocabulary does lead you to a certain picture of cognitive diminishment.”

Trump’s habit of speaking off-topic is likely related to the frontal lobe, the part of the brain involved in executive function such as planning and problem-solving, said Andrew Budson, a neurology professor at Boston University and author of “Seven Steps to Managing Your Aging Memory.” This is the area of the brain and aspect of thinking that is most often affected by aging, which makes it difficult to remain focused on one topic, and leads to jumping around in conversation. Such a habit could also reflect ADHD or poor sleep, he said, though it can also be a sign of impending Alzheimer’s.

“There are absolutely changes that are occurring, without any doubt,” he said. Previously, Trump was more focused on topics and could articulately describe events. “Now, it’s much more about evoking different things, using general terms and saying the same thing again and again, then jumping to something else, then jumping back to it,” he added.

Trending Now: ‘Jerking families around’: Canceled Roche rare disease trial devastates parents, angers researchers
This repetitive speaking style could indicate decreased efficiency in the frontal lobe, said Budson, though this could also happen with normal aging rather than a pathological condition. He added that the changes in Trump’s speaking style since 2017 could also reflect a political strategy and desire to connect with a certain audience, or else an increasingly relaxed manner around crowds Trump feels comfortable with.

In addition to shorter sentences, Michaelis noticed Trump using words in the wrong order or inventing words, which adds to confusion in understanding him, and can be signs of cognitive problems that come either with natural aging or conditions such as Alzheimer’s. He pointed to this passage from a campaign event in January:

“We’re also going to place strong protections to stop banks and regulators from trying to debank you from your political beliefs,” Trump said in the New Hampshire speech. “What they do, they want to debank you. And we are going to debank, think of this. They want to take away your rights. They want to take away your country, the things you’re doing. All electric cars. Give me a break. If you want an electric car, good. But they don’t go far. They’re very expensive.”

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
by NattyBohChamps04
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 3:06 pm
by Typical Lax Dad

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 3:54 pm
by Farfromgeneva
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.
He used the word epidemic with respect to DUIs. It was lost when that word was chosen back then.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 3:56 pm
by Farfromgeneva
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:51 am Highlights for Kids. What's the differences between these two pictures?!

Image
Thais future mysoginists at bottom are like “why are these bi**he’s taking up so much of our picture instead of barefoot in a kitchen making me a snack”

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 3:57 pm
by Farfromgeneva
Kismet wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:17 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:05 am You never heard that before ? That's hardly an original line.
I didn't say it was original. As usual, you can't read anything without supplying YOUR opinion. May explain why so many people here give you the sh!t you deserve for your typical condescending tripe. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I think we both know there’s nothing original going on there..

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 3:58 pm
by Farfromgeneva
njbill wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:28 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:05 am You never heard that before ? That's hardly an original line.
I first heard the line in a Warren Zevon song (I’ll Sleep When I’m Dead) from his 1976 album. Looking it up, I see others are said to have said similar things even before that, including Ben Franklin.
I got your zevon.

An no it’s not lawyers guns and money

https://youtu.be/RMTKb-pgxGI?si=ksSyhqR8PV7UPhIJ

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:00 pm
by Farfromgeneva
DMac wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:22 am
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am
a fan wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 11:15 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 10:43 pm
a fan wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 9:55 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 4:51 pm https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis ... /600850577

Plus: Women's reproductive autonomy/health. K-12 meals.
Minus: Decide for yourself.
Skeleton: Old DWI arrest with perjury about being "deaf". Doing 95 in 55 zone. Failed field sobriety test and test in hospital. Sweetheart plea reduces charges to reckless driving. He was a high school teacher at the time. No excuses work for me. None. I have zero tolerance for America's lack of interest in addressing it's DWI epidemic/crisis (especially when the numbers of innocent victims killed by DWI violence averages 5,000/year in America, while the number of innocent victims killed by all rifles averages ~500/year in America). Another 8,000 DWI deaths (on top of that 5,000) are the drunk drivers who kill themselves.
Killed by "all rifles". That's quite the new statistical subcategory you've made up, my man. ;)
Straight from our government, my man. "All rifles" = Shotguns, bolt-action, semi-automatic. You're clever, search engine the classification. Hint: three letter agency. Fact: of homicide in America by all means (knives, fists/feet, bats, hammers, handguns, all rifles) year in and year out, the "all rifles" category usually clocks in at ~500 per year out of ~20k. :roll:
:lol: So....intentionally omit handguns, and hope no one notices? Come on, man.

And it was 40K gun deaths last year, btw.

You can make your points here without the absurd spin. NO ONE here wants to take away your guns, my man.
Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
Okay, does this define who he is forevermore? Should he wear a DWI necklace, vis-a-vi the Scarlet Letter, for the rest of his life?
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?" Where are calls for every single vehicle in America to have a breathalyzer lockout? You blow below - or you don't go! All of us. Nonsense. You willing to pay for that feature on your new car? While a minority, there are quite a number of non drinkers across the USofA, they should have to pay one of these too? It would save 10x the innocent lives as those killed by all rifles, including "assault weapons". Where is the the bipartisan bill to get that done?
4) Let's not forget Walz is an "assault weapons" ban proponent. Hypocrite much, Tim?
5) You jump in with a "all rifle" observation.
6) I provide the category is one our government reports use, and reiterate the small % of "all rifles" every year in overall murder.
7) You suggest I'm avoiding addressing handguns. Not avoiding: see 3) above for what I initially brought up and why. Let's have our handgun fun over on Sensible.
8) Enter into the conversation the CDC conflated gun deaths numbers padded by suicide (as gun violence). We can take that to the Sensible thread, and talk about suicide not being a crime, and question why the 45% of suicides of males and the predominant method of suicide for females in America are by Rope, Pills, Gravity, Razors, Suffocation. We can then ask why there isn't Rope Violence, Gravity Violence, Pill Violence...etc. And go round and round. And we can ask about why the CDC quietly stopped reporting on Defensive Gun Uses a few years ago under pressure from those who's narrative was being undermined by those inconvenient truths. Great. See you on Sensible.

In terms of MADD posed by another poster above, that organization should indeed have something to say about Walz DWI and the subsequent shady claims & plea. And here's a ridiculous aside spin to enjoy with your morning coffee: Folks here ever ask themselves why MADD has never blamed Ford, Chevy, GMC or Mercedes for the actions of human beings who commit the crime of vehicular murder? No, never gave it much thought,because...well, because vehicles aren't made to kill. Remember, it is occurring at a rate of 10x compared to "all rifles", year in and year out. In furtherance of America's unwillingness to take on this massive public health scourge we have this from Monday:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/well ... 1799cc302c

Semantics, heuristics, gymnastics, absurd spin. Whatever.

Please resume this thread with apologies for pointing out two things vis-a-vis Walz: how much I loathe DWI (and I have good reason), and how much I loathe our leader's obsessive fixation on something that kills 1/10th the number of innocent victims as DWI violence does. We don't need to get into the rest of my "Where's the outrage?" hypocrisy greatest hits list I've posted and pondered about numerous times on the Sensible thread.

So, yeah, Walz as a DWI arrested hypocrite leaning in on AWB's can kiss my...
That's right, 2A baby. Anything and everything the militia needs to kill is completely justifiable (to you and the 2A abusers crowd).
You need to do a background check on the people you associate with and do business with as I'd bet more than one . of them has had a DWI/DUI. You need to write those people off as that's their defining moment.

And you fine folks, who I do appreciate in the majority and the aggregate, have a lovely day.
You love engaging with Peter brown brother.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:02 pm
by Farfromgeneva
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:35 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:02 am Lying with crime stats.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/08/ ... l-mystery/

The Truth about the Crime Explosion

by JOHN R. LOTT JR., August 7, 2024

Misunderstanding what the crime statistics measure and hiding the rise in crime
‘The false message of the RNC was that [illegal immigration] was leading to an increase in crime,” Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg claimed on Fox News Sunday. “If you look this up at home, you will know that crime went down under Biden and crime went up under Trump. Why would America want to go back to the higher crime we experienced under Donald Trump?”

A Gallup survey last November showed that 92 percent of Republicans and even 58 percent of Democrats believed that crime was rising. In a series of surveys from March last year to April this year, Rasmussen Reports finds a remarkably constant percentage of Americans who believe that violent crime is getting worse — 60 percent to 61 percent. Roughly four times as many people think violent crime is rising rather than getting better.

News outlets keep claiming that Americans are wrong to believe that crime is rising. But Americans aren’t mistaken.
If you defund the police so arrest rates plummet and people give up reporting crime, then crime statistics can look good even as chaos ensues.
Americans in many parts of the country see that products at CVS or Walgreens stores are behind glass, that they must call a clerk to unlock the glass and then wait while reading and examining the different packages. People know this is costly and something other than what the companies would prefer to do, but they have no choice. Americans also know that things were not like this a few years ago.

Property crime isn’t the only type of crime that is increasing. Violent crime has also gone up.
Those who say crime is falling rely on the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS). But the problem is that the FBI data only count crime that is reported to police, not total crime, and even then, the FBI does a poor job of measuring reported crime.

There are two measures of crime. The FBI’s NIBRS counts the number of crimes reported to police each year, but the Bureau of Justice Statistics uses its National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) to ask about 240,000 people each year whether they have been victims of crime. Since 2020, these two measures have been highly negatively correlated. The FBI has been finding fewer instances of crime, but people are simultaneously answering in greater numbers that they have been victims.

There are several reasons for this difference, but a simple one is that law enforcement has collapsed. If people think criminals won’t be caught and punished, they are less likely to report crime to the police. Using the FBI data, if you compare the five years preceding Covid-19 with 2022, the percentage of urban reported violent crimes resulting in an arrest fell from 44 percent to 35 percent. And among cities with more than 1 million people (where most reported violent crime occurs), arrest rates plunged by more than half, from 44 percent to 20 percent. There has never been a similar drop in FBI data.

Criminals face few risks when committing crime. In 2022, in cities with more than a million people, only 8 percent of all violent crimes (reported and unreported) and 1 percent of all property crimes resulted in an arrest. Of course, not all those arrests resulted in charges, let alone prosecutions or convictions.

In large cities, the arrest rate in 2022, compared with the average from 2015 to 2019, fell by 38 percent for murders, 50 percent for rapes, 55 percent for aggravated assault, and 58 percent for robberies. As police budgets were cut and a large number of police retired, police concentrated their limited resources on the most serious crimes, particularly murder.

As mentioned above, since 2020, the numbers for FBI’s reported crimes and the NCVS’s total (reported and unreported) crimes have gone in opposite directions. For instance, in 2022, the FBI reported a 2.1 percent drop in violent crime, but the NCVS showed an alarming increase of 42.4 percent — the largest one-year percentage increase in violent crime ever reported by the NCVS. The increase in 2022 over 2020 is slightly greater.

It is puzzling enough that reported and total crime measures don’t match. But a more fundamental problem exists for those relying on the FBI data. The FBI’s and NCVS’s reported crime estimates have also gone in opposite directions since 2020. From 2008 to 2019, the FBI and NCVS measures of reported violent crimes generally tended to move up and down together. But from 2020 to 2022, these two numbers were almost perfectly negatively correlated to each other (-0.9599). Each time one measure of reported violent crimes rose, the other measure fell.

While the FBI’s number of reported violent crimes fell by 2 percent in 2021 and 2.1 percent in 2022, the NCVS’s measure showed increases of 13.6 percent and 29.3 percent, respectively. When even these two measures of the same thing — reported crime — are going in opposite directions, there are real concerns about the FBI data.

A frequently discussed concern with the FBI data and a possible explanation for part of the discrepancies is the decline in the number of crimes reported by police departments after a new reporting system was introduced in 2021. In 2022, 31 percent of police departments nationwide, including in Los Angeles and New York, didn’t report crime data to the FBI. Another 24 percent of departments only partially reported data. So fewer than half of police departments reported complete data in 2022. That is better than 2021 but still much worse than the 97 percent of agencies covering most of the U.S. reported in 2020. In addition, in cities from Baltimore to Nashville, the FBI is undercounting crimes those jurisdictions reported.

Still other problems exist. The downgrading of crimes by police departments can also explain the drop in the FBI numbers. Classifying an aggravated assault as a simple assault means that it will be excluded from FBI violent-crime data, which doesn’t include simple assaults. The difference often involves whether the criminal used a weapon in committing an assault, but many radically left-leaning DAs are refusing to include weapons charges against defendants. That could explain the difference between the two measures of reported crime, because the NCVS will ask victims whether the assault involved a weapon, even if the police reports ignore that characteristic of the crime.

Progressive district attorneys nationwide, from New York to Chicago to Los Angeles, are downgrading felonies to misdemeanors. Recent numbers show that Manhattan’s progressive DA downgraded felonies to lesser charges 60 percent of the time; and, of that 60 percent, 89 percent were downgraded to misdemeanors. That isn’t a new problem. In the past, Chicago has intentionally misclassified murders, instead labeling them as subject to noncriminal “death investigations.” However, the problem may be increasing, and police may also be responding to the decisions of prosecutors.

Over the past few years, as the number of police has fallen because of cuts in budgets and a slew of retirements, police departments nationwide from Charlottesville and Henrico County, Va., to Chicago to Olympia, Wash., stopped responding to nonemergency 911 calls. Instead of police coming out, people can still go to the police station. There is the possibility that people think that calling 911 reports a crime, but a crime officially counts only once police make out a report.

Much is made of the drop in murder rates over the past few years. Murder rates dropped by 13 percent in 2023, though the preliminary 2023 murder rate is still 7 percent above 2019 levels. The NCVS doesn’t survey its respondents about murder, but the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has a measure that doesn’t match up with the FBI data. While the FBI shows murder peaking in 2020 and dropping in 2021 and 2022, the CDC shows it peaking in 2021 and higher in 2022 than in 2020 (2022 is the latest year that the CDC data are available).

Inevitably, the crime statistics have become a campaign issue, with the Trump campaign highlighting the NCVS data while “fact-checkers” either ignore the NCVS data or assert that the FBI NIBRS data are more believable.

But those who want to use the FBI NIBRS data face a puzzle. If the FBI data show that arrest rates are crashing, why is reported crime falling? The drop in arrest rates makes much more sense with rising crime rates. People also say that they are reporting more crimes to the police, but that isn’t showing up in the FBI reports. The fact that the FBI data are inconsistent with both the Bureau of Justice Statistics and CDC data should also raise concerns.

Even if the media want to rely solely on the FBI, they must acknowledge the plummeting arrest rates.

It’s baffling why anyone would want to look at only reported crimes rather than total (reported and unreported) crimes when we know that victims don’t report most crimes to the police.

There is a crime emergency in our country, and misleadingly using statistics to cover it up, as Mayor Pete does, endangers us all.
Hang on, this cat has many, many times been proven to be a right wing charlatan. He's a super Trumpy election denier who has made a career of being a far right extremist under the guise of "research and statistics".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Pretty clear who is "lying" and it ain't Buttigieg nor the FBI.
These statistic debates are so stupid having seen the error rate in so many econometric models and so many tossing them a round don’t even understand this or other aspects of economic modelling.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:03 pm
by Farfromgeneva
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:45 am
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am
a fan wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 11:15 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 10:43 pm
a fan wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 9:55 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Tue Aug 06, 2024 4:51 pm https://www.startribune.com/minneapolis ... /600850577

Plus: Women's reproductive autonomy/health. K-12 meals.
Minus: Decide for yourself.
Skeleton: Old DWI arrest with perjury about being "deaf". Doing 95 in 55 zone. Failed field sobriety test and test in hospital. Sweetheart plea reduces charges to reckless driving. He was a high school teacher at the time. No excuses work for me. None. I have zero tolerance for America's lack of interest in addressing it's DWI epidemic/crisis (especially when the numbers of innocent victims killed by DWI violence averages 5,000/year in America, while the number of innocent victims killed by all rifles averages ~500/year in America). Another 8,000 DWI deaths (on top of that 5,000) are the drunk drivers who kill themselves.
Killed by "all rifles". That's quite the new statistical subcategory you've made up, my man. ;)
Straight from our government, my man. "All rifles" = Shotguns, bolt-action, semi-automatic. You're clever, search engine the classification. Hint: three letter agency. Fact: of homicide in America by all means (knives, fists/feet, bats, hammers, handguns, all rifles) year in and year out, the "all rifles" category usually clocks in at ~500 per year out of ~20k. :roll:
:lol: So....intentionally omit handguns, and hope no one notices? Come on, man.

And it was 40K gun deaths last year, btw.

You can make your points here without the absurd spin. NO ONE here wants to take away your guns, my man.
Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?" Where are calls for every single vehicle in America to have a breathalyzer lockout? You blow below - or you don't go! All of us. It would save 10x the innocent lives as those killed by all rifles, including "assault weapons". Where is the the bipartisan bill to get that done?
4) Let's not forget Walz is an "assault weapons" ban proponent. Hypocrite much, Tim?
5) You jump in with a "all rifle" observation.
6) I provide the category is one our government reports use, and reiterate the small % of "all rifles" every year in overall murder.
7) You suggest I'm avoiding addressing handguns. Not avoiding: see 3) above for what I initially brought up and why. Let's have our handgun fun over on Sensible.
8) Enter into the conversation the CDC conflated gun deaths numbers padded by suicide (as gun violence). We can take that to the Sensible thread, and talk about suicide not being a crime, and question why the 45% of suicides of males and the predominant method of suicide for females in America are by Rope, Pills, Gravity, Razors, Suffocation. We can then ask why there isn't Rope Violence, Gravity Violence, Pill Violence...etc. And go round and round. And we can ask about why the CDC quietly stopped reporting on Defensive Gun Uses a few years ago under pressure from those who's narrative was being undermined by those inconvenient truths. Great. See you on Sensible.

In terms of MADD posed by another poster above, that organization should indeed have something to say about Walz DWI and the subsequent shady claims & plea. And here's a ridiculous aside spin to enjoy with your morning coffee: Folks here ever ask themselves why MADD has never blamed Ford, Chevy, GMC or Mercedes for the actions of human beings who commit the crime of vehicular murder? Remember, it is occurring at a rate of 10x compared to "all rifles", year in and year out. In furtherance of America's unwillingness to take on this massive public health scourge we have this from Monday:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/05/well ... 1799cc302c

Semantics, heuristics, gymnastics, absurd spin. Whatever.

Please resume this thread with apologies for pointing out two things vis-a-vis Walz: how much I loathe DWI (and I have good reason), and how much I loathe our leader's obsessive fixation on something that kills 1/10th the number of innocent victims as DWI violence does. We don't need to get into the rest of my "Where's the outrage?" hypocrisy greatest hits list I've posted and pondered about numerous times on the Sensible thread.

So, yeah, Walz as a DWI arrested hypocrite leaning in on AWB's can kiss my...

And you fine folks, who I do appreciate in the majority and the aggregate, have a lovely day.
well, that was predictable, but I wanted to at least give you a chance.
A morally and intellectually bankrupt waste of server space in these posts if his.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:05 pm
by Farfromgeneva
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 11:36 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 11:30 am
Kismet wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:50 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:26 am
Kismet wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:23 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:17 am
Kismet wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:17 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:05 am You never heard that before ? That's hardly an original line.
I didn't say it was original. As usual, you can't read anything without supplying YOUR opinion. May explain why so many people here give you the sh!t you deserve for your typical condescending tripe. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Rabbit ears. That's why I asked the ?
Keeping trying to justify your a-hole tendencies - may explain why you like the penultimate a-hole - Orange Fatso. :oops:
You poor baby. Don't holler 'til you're hurt. :cry:
If the shoe fits, wear it a-hole. Otherwise have a good day :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!: :!:
I don't attack without provocation. I hit back.
You won’t be cowed.
Hits so soft nothing like this

https://youtu.be/5jIGMHEXSnQ?si=IetUA160k-Mgu6-n

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:07 pm
by Farfromgeneva
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:16 pm
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:05 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:35 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:02 am Lying with crime stats.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/08/ ... l-mystery/

The Truth about the Crime Explosion

by JOHN R. LOTT JR., August 7, 2024

Misunderstanding what the crime statistics measure and hiding the rise in crime
Hang on, this cat has many, many times been proven to be a right wing charlatan. He's a super Trumpy election denier who has made a career of being a far right extremist under the guise of "research and statistics".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Pretty clear who is "lying" and it ain't Buttigieg nor the FBI.
The National Review fact checks what they publish.
I trust them on this, even if you don't like this author.
NR has a larger readership than you do.
Seriously? "fact checks" ???

It's an opinion piece, not journalism.
It's all this proven liar's opinion, not even necessarily the Editorial Board's opinion (though that's very suspect as well).

I love the "NR has a larger readership than you do."
Sure, but wikipedia has a way larger readership than does NR.

And that's a challenge system, way, way, way more likely to be "fact checked" than NR's opinion pieces.

It's always very revealing that partisans (on either side or extreme) refuse to bother to look at the history of someone pandering to their basest bigotries. When someone has a history of lying, especially with the veneer of "research and statistics", their credibility when citing such should be hugely diminished. But partisans and extremists (and fools) are willing to give credibility only to what reinforces their ignorant bigotries.

And this "author" has a history of flaming lies.

But hey, keep spreading such BS. It works on lots of people.
Husserls contextual relevance is meaningful

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:08 pm
by a fan
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.
You got it immediately.

If he wants guns and drunk driving treated the same, he's about to get REALLY angry at all the new laws, rules, regulations, fees, licenses etc. heading his way.

Waffle: did you know I have to pay a fee and register every spirits label I distribute to every State we sell our wares in? Picture gun manufacturers having to have a license in every State....simply because. Some States charge $1000 per label per year.

And that's just the start. The stuff I have to deal with would make your head spin.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:09 pm
by Farfromgeneva
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
I think the kids call this “equivocation” these days…

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:10 pm
by Farfromgeneva
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.
I used madd like Kleenex but same point as your making.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:19 pm
by a fan
Farfromgeneva wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:10 pm
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.
I used madd like Kleenex but same point as your making.
Stricter laws on DUI's and minimum alcohol in blood that's allowed, higher taxes on alcohol, rules and regulations at every level of .gov, State run booze shops, tighter and better ID's, and on and on and on....

......Waffle clearly has missed all we've done since the 80's when drunk driving was seen as a serious problem. And Waffle...you do NOT want this happening to your guns. I don't even have to ask you if you want guns treated like drunk driving.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:26 pm
by Farfromgeneva
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:19 pm
Farfromgeneva wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 4:10 pm
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 2:43 pm
a fan wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 1:13 pm
WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 8:15 am Let's try to unpack this granularly, and we can take any needed additional discussions over to Sensible Guns.

1) Walz named as VP choice.
2) I dislike his DWI arrest and circumstances.
3) As more of an aside than anything else, I point out that innocent Americans are murdered at a rate 10x that of - and I use "all rifles" category our government uses which encompasses "assault weapons" - to basically say "wow, with all the enmity for assault weapons, one would wonder why not 10x the enmity for drunk driving?"
Happy to answer, and you're not going to like where this ends.

Let's start here: what you're asking here is for rifles and drunk driving to be treated equally by our State and Federal Government.

Do I have that right?
Putting aside the regulation point, he's ignoring the fact that we've had way more than 10x the enmity against drunk driving for a very long time. How many billions of dollars has been spent fighting drunk driving over the decades? How many non-profit groups have sprung up, and how many government campaigns have been run? How many new laws and regulations and punishments have been put in place? Makes gun safety campaigns look piddly.

And you know what? Alcohol related auto deaths are down. Both total numbers and per-capita. You know what's more important? Total alcohol related crashes are down as well. Meaning it's not just car safety that's causing the drop. For instance Here's some of Minnesota's #s over time (page 31)

Meanwhile gun related deaths are not following the same trajectory the past decade.
I used madd like Kleenex but same point as your making.
Stricter laws on DUI's and minimum alcohol in blood that's allowed, higher taxes on alcohol, rules and regulations at every level of .gov, State run booze shops, tighter and better ID's, and on and on and on....

......Waffle clearly has missed all we've done since the 80's when drunk driving was seen as a serious problem. And Waffle...you do NOT want this happening to your guns. I don't even have to ask you if you want guns treated like drunk driving.
It’s was a joke and clearly propaganda from the break in that.

I love the “let’s get granular here” facade and pretense of intellectualism followed by weak form heuristics a community college dropout could see through. Strippers could run better intellectual game .

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 6:01 pm
by old salt
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:16 pm
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:05 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:35 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:02 am Lying with crime stats.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/08/ ... l-mystery/

The Truth about the Crime Explosion

by JOHN R. LOTT JR., August 7, 2024

Misunderstanding what the crime statistics measure and hiding the rise in crime
Hang on, this cat has many, many times been proven to be a right wing charlatan. He's a super Trumpy election denier who has made a career of being a far right extremist under the guise of "research and statistics".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Pretty clear who is "lying" and it ain't Buttigieg nor the FBI.
The National Review fact checks what they publish.
I trust them on this, even if you don't like this author.
NR has a larger readership than you do.
Seriously? "fact checks" ???

It's an opinion piece, not journalism.
It's all this proven liar's opinion, not even necessarily the Editorial Board's opinion (though that's very suspect as well).

I love the "NR has a larger readership than you do."
Sure, but wikipedia has a way larger readership than does NR.

And that's a challenge system, way, way, way more likely to be "fact checked" than NR's opinion pieces.

It's always very revealing that partisans (on either side or extreme) refuse to bother to look at the history of someone pandering to their basest bigotries. When someone has a history of lying, especially with the veneer of "research and statistics", their credibility when citing such should be hugely diminished. But partisans and extremists (and fools) are willing to give credibility only to what reinforces their ignorant bigotries.

And this "author" has a history of flaming lies.

But hey, keep spreading such BS. It works on lots of people.
Right. Keep deluding yourself. Retailers are locking away their inventory because of flaming lies. Keep denying the obvious.
Carjackings & vehicle theft are not really happening. It's the car makers fault.
https://stateline.org/2024/02/09/car-th ... point-why/

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 6:11 pm
by MDlaxfan76
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 6:01 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:16 pm
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 12:05 pm
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:35 am
old salt wrote: Wed Aug 07, 2024 10:02 am Lying with crime stats.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2024/08/ ... l-mystery/

The Truth about the Crime Explosion

by JOHN R. LOTT JR., August 7, 2024

Misunderstanding what the crime statistics measure and hiding the rise in crime
Hang on, this cat has many, many times been proven to be a right wing charlatan. He's a super Trumpy election denier who has made a career of being a far right extremist under the guise of "research and statistics".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Pretty clear who is "lying" and it ain't Buttigieg nor the FBI.
The National Review fact checks what they publish.
I trust them on this, even if you don't like this author.
NR has a larger readership than you do.
Seriously? "fact checks" ???

It's an opinion piece, not journalism.
It's all this proven liar's opinion, not even necessarily the Editorial Board's opinion (though that's very suspect as well).

I love the "NR has a larger readership than you do."
Sure, but wikipedia has a way larger readership than does NR.

And that's a challenge system, way, way, way more likely to be "fact checked" than NR's opinion pieces.

It's always very revealing that partisans (on either side or extreme) refuse to bother to look at the history of someone pandering to their basest bigotries. When someone has a history of lying, especially with the veneer of "research and statistics", their credibility when citing such should be hugely diminished. But partisans and extremists (and fools) are willing to give credibility only to what reinforces their ignorant bigotries.

And this "author" has a history of flaming lies.

But hey, keep spreading such BS. It works on lots of people.
Right. Keep deluding yourself. Retailers are locking away their inventory because of flaming lies. Keep denying the obvious.
nope, no one is arguing that retail gang theft isn't a serious problem. And it went way up.
Police are getting better organized to battle it. Important.

Property crime in general has been way too high.

But violent crime is way down, thank goodness, as it went up a heck of a lot during the pandemic. And was on the rise before...during Trump Admin.

But now down to 50 year lows, thankfully.

But hey, keep drinking your right wing media BS. Tastes good to those thirsty for it.

Re: 2024

Posted: Wed Aug 07, 2024 6:13 pm
by DMac
Alcohol is a significant risk factor in gun-related deaths123. Here are some key points:
An estimated 1 in 3 gun homicide perpetrators drank heavily before committing murder.
30% of gun homicide victims were heavily drinking before being killed.
A quarter of gun suicide victims were heavily drinking before their deaths.
Excessive drinking is associated with increased gun homicides and suicides.
Alcohol misuse among legal gun owners increases the risk of interpersonal gun violence.
What say ye about breathalyzers on guns, Waffle?
Just gotta hope not too many of the militia are drunk when the fit hits the shan.