Every house have a 5 gallon water jug where you live?
Burglar's relative says: "He could have used a warning shot first..."
- Thread starter Uncle Ben
- Start date
Every house have a 5 gallon water jug where you live?
Sand4x105
Well-Known Member
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
She ended up having to, and my aunt had to pay taxes and registration on it she couldn't afford; not to mention the part where she had no stable employment and couldn't maintain solid insurance for it. So everything went south from there. It's not a sob story. These days my grandma qualifies for section 8 in a location with reasonable transport costs. Before it was bullshit because she had to give her only transportation to the least responsible family member she had.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
When I lived in the high desert? Damn near. Up here, it's only slightly less and sparkletts doesn't even cover this area.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
If you're carrying a weapon you should be aware of potential threats and not walk into them. If someone jumping from behind a bush is a reasonable threat, then you only walk into that threat if you just went full retard tactically. It has nothing to do with magazines or sidewalk inherently.
Seriously, does the concept of how to act as a hard target elude you?
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
Tell you what, you walk by a random assortment of cover and concealment that is known for criminals lurking within it, I'll avoid it. You go looking for trouble armed and I'll avoid it while unarmed. Let's see who ends up stabbed first. Sound good?
Could be, however, it could also be that the motherfucker doesn't have the genes to behave in "civilized" society. There are families that have multiple generations that have been worthless piece of shit criminals. Why?
Defective genes.
They lack the capacity to empathize with their fellow man and believe THEIR needs outweigh those of their fellow citizens.
To say all of these worthless pieces of shit are simply "hungry" or "can't get a job" is bullshit. Most of them are just fucking lazy, have no personal discipline, and want to do their own thing at the expense of others, and amazingly enough, they pass these traits on to their spawn.
To deny genetic factors would indeed be "talking out your ass".
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
You seem to be confusing genes with a parent's ability to fuck up their children. Unless you can demonstrate how the thief gene manifests so strongly in groups with fewer economic options. Until then, it's just un-cited flights of fancy.
jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
I read the book the Triple Package by Amy Chua.
Cultural upbringings have a substantial impact on were one fits into society.
Interesting fact: Nigerian Americans earn doctorates at a stunningly higher rate than any other cultural group in America.
Hereditary behavioral traits have been repeatedly demonstrated in many animal breeding programs. However, because of the tendency to associate human, and animal, genetic research with the fucked up eugenics programs favored by the likes of NAZI Germany, the subject tends to be taboo.
Working dogs are but one example of how genes impact behavior. There's a gojillion german shepherds, labs, and border collies, however, only a select few have what it takes to become an effective working dog. Why? They're all basically the same right?
Not so much.
While you can easily find 100 german shepherds, only a few will have the desire to work hours on end. This desire, or "drive", can NOT be trained. Either the dog "has" it, or it doesn't. It's in the genes. Working dogs, and sport dogs alike, were bred for desirable traits, but ever since they became more popular for pet purposes, the gene pool has become corrupted through shitty breeding practices. The pet dogs you see for sale and in the homes of most folks no longer have the genetic material they were designed for, and you'd have to test 100's before you could find one viable candidate for a working program.
Genetics matter. Genetics have a direct impact on behavior.
Look at human families. Why is it that some families have generation after generation involved in criminal activity? While environmental factors can not be ignored, neither can genetic factors. Shitbags breeding with shitbags will result in the creation of more shitbags. It's in the genes.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
I have to ask, you do know that correlation does not equal causation right? Children are impressionable, and being born into a family with shitty economic prospects that happens to resort to criminal activity is a good way to impress that it's okay to be a criminal. You're ignoring huge aspects of a social creature's reactions in a group setting; which is much more reasonable and supportable than "genes made him a criminal". Unless you're saying that poor people tend to be genetically inferior to the rich, as the poor tend to be convicted of more crimes.
When someone gives you a vehicle, you don't pay taxes on it. so looks like grammy took advantage of her.
I am sure the annual $50 registration was a killer for your poor aunt.
If grammy would have been smart, she would have told them she used the car for her mail order business so that she could get customer orders shipped.
Poor granny, forced to sell her car to a family member who couldn't afford it in the first place, just so that she could get welfare.
In my family we take care of each other, sorry yours doesn't.
Why would you be out walking where the bad parts of town are? where you KNOW criminals hang out? Seems to me you would avoid those areas of town in the first place, but then again if you walk in the street, no one can get you there, not criminals anyway, they only jump out of concealed areas to get the jump on people.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
Criminals pick soft targets, they don't like witnesses or crowds generally. You can choose to decide that I would for some reason walk into traffic, and not on the edge of the road where it would be dumb to jump someone. However, that would be a ridiculous assumption.I avoid the bad parts of town, but that doesn't mean that the bad folks haven't changed things up. If it's dark and I'm alone, then I avoid areas that put me at risk whenever possible. The town I live in is all residential, and the tweakers do lurk in overgrowth by alleys and the various river crossings in town. If it's dark, and you can't see your surroundings clearly, then you should be avoiding the area. Excuse me for keeping my examples simple for you; I shall elaborate. Avoid: Large unkempt growth, poorly lit alleys and roads, people that tell you that you got a purdy mouth, and strangers in windowless vans offering sugary treats. Proceed thoroiugh: Well lit areas and high traffic areas. Better? Like I said, make yourself a hard target and you will rarely have trouble.
Why the hell would I remain ignorant of the places I should not venture? Of course I know where the bad areas are; that's just good sense.
I just drive my car.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
Obviously, there's a bit more depth to this, but at this point your tone makes it clear proceeding further with this topic is futile. Apparently you just like it when old women who worked their asses off when they could see fall on hard times.
Also, did you just tell me I should have had my grandmother lie?
Dr Kynes
Well-Known Member
\
you chose the canadian Uniform Crime Statistics for one set of numbers, and a crazy anti-gun organization for the american numbers using a BULLSHIT crazy claim of 14612 firearms homicides.
you know we too have a Uniform Crime report, from a little organization called the FBI, maybe you've heard of them.
the fbi statistics from 2011 (latest info published) are quite different.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-data-table-8
8583 firearms homicides in 2011, not 14,000.
you can only get 14000 firearms homicides if you include ALL homicides (which the canadians do not) suicide (which the canadians do not) or accidents (which the canadians do not) or people who get eaten by bears because they DIDNT have a gun (which i assume is quite common in canada)
8583 / 3138 = 2.7, NOT 4.66
so canada in 2011 had a 1.7 firearms homicide rate/100,00, and the US had a 2.7/100,00 rate.
not so different. but thats why you chase down stats from gun grabbers instead of using the Uniform Crime Report, like you do for the canadian rate.
kpmarine
Well-Known Member
Seems like a waste when there's a close store that I can stroll to.