Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some logical Jesuit guy)   Some smarty-pants HS educator gives a great impromptu analysis of what can be taught to our kids from the Aurora media coverage. Difficulty: lots of words, reason   (geekreflection.blogspot.com ) divider line
    More: Cool, morning  
•       •       •

13793 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Jul 2012 at 2:16 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-07-21 02:40:06 AM  
15 votes:
A buddy just wrote this, and I have to share.

For all of you out there who may be thinking, like Congressman Gohmert, that had one or more of the members of the audience for The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado been armed that he would have been able to successfully neutralize the attack, I would like to remind you of this:

On March 21, 1981, Ronald Reagan, The President of the United States, was shot while surrounded by the best trained bodyguards on planet Earth, all of whom were armed with the very best weaponry and other equipment available. The shooter, John Hinckley, Jr., was not fired at. In fact, he got punched in the head and pulled to the ground by Alfred Antenucci, a Cleveland, Ohio, labor official, who happened to be standing near to Hinckley when he opened fire.

My point, and I say this as a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, is that other people with guns don't necessarily equal stopping the bad guy or preventing loss of like, The Secret Service didn't open fire on Hinckley because they were in a crowd and they considered the risk of hitting innocent civilians to be too great. Again, these are some of the best trained marksmen on the planet and they think taking shots in that situation is too big of a risk. Why then do these people assume that Joe Citizen should take risks that vastly more qualified individuals would refuse to take and that said risk would pay off?

The sad truth we must all realize is that there is no way to prevent this from happening. No one could have predicted that a madman would shoot up a movie premiere. Or that a kid would shoot up his university, or a high school. There are the acts of madmen. Banning guns wouldn't have stopped it, and armed citizens in the theatre weren't likely to have stopped it either. We don't want to admit this because it's a scary truth. But remember that even though the news coverage will be constant and playing up the fear, the statistical likelihood of being caught in a shooting spree of this type is still infinitessimal.
2012-07-21 04:49:09 AM  
4 votes:

sminkypinky: I'm getting advice on how discern fact and truth from a guy who believes all of the stuff in a 2000 year old book of fiction called the Bible?


Thanks Troll. Have you always been a bigot? or is this new ground for you? The fact that the blogger has a set of beliefs which you disagree with does not make him wrong, nor does it undermine his credibility with respect to his analysis of the media and it's handling of the tragedy or any of his assertions.

Your comment simply reveals you to be what you are: a superficial boor with neither taste nor class.
2012-07-21 06:39:23 PM  
3 votes:

hubiestubert: Americans have ALWAYS been addicted to quick fixes for complex problems. In part, because we are a nation of folks who figured our best bet was to start all over with a fresh start. That has colored our thinking for a long time. Opportunity and freedom are our drugs of choice. Opportunity is the opiate of the masses, not television. EVERYONE has the opportunity to become a millionaire we are taught. Land of opportunity. That is the monomyth that our nation is founded upon.

To guarantee that freedom and that opportunity, takes some work, and most folks don't like the sort of work that it entails. It takes away from the day to day concerns. We are a nation built by farmers and intellectuals, printers and machinists, engineer and educators, but we have always somewhat feared the intelligentsia, because there is a creeping distrust in the idea that some folks might use those smarts to be MOAR equal than others. We like the myth that everyone is equal, but we'd prefer it if WE were MOAR equal, and better, and that is, in part, why we love the feet of clay stories. We like heroes, but we LOVE when they tumble and fall.


You'll notice that America is unique in that we very recently (historically speaking) had the space and ability to just haul stakes and leave when we needed opportunity. Even as recently as the 1930's someone with problems at home could just hop a train, go a couple hundred miles west, and start all over again. There was still space and opportunity "out west". In Europe, they haven't had that kind of option for over a thousand years--which was about the last time Europeans were randomly killing each other without repercussion.

And America is unique compared to other former British colonies in that pretty much all the country was equally inhabitable. Moving away from the cities was less of an option in Australia (big interior desert) or Canadia (half the country is covered in ice). So Americans got used to the idea they could just pack up and leave when things got messy. And the overall wealth of the country ensured that anyone COULD go west and make their fortune, comparatively speaking--if you started as a starving immigrant laborer in New York City, then things were 1000% better when you filed your homestead claim and had to become a farmer, but it was your OWN farm.

America has reached the point where we can't expand much more, and now we have to learn to live with each other; if we seem to be having more problems it's only because in Europe they had to figure it out in 1400, and they've had more time to adjust.
2012-07-21 03:13:10 AM  
3 votes:
I had this on TV this morning as white noise. My 12 year old daughter came downstairs and started watching, I thought it would be unfair to change the channel to try to shield her from the news so I let her watch and when she had questions or needed explanations, (the town we live in is named Aurora also, but not in CO). I explained to her as well as I could that sometimes people do things for no explainable reason and that very rarely, really sick people do really sick things, again for no explainable reasons.

But the best part of our conversation came about 20 minutes after she came downstairs and she called BS on the Today show for showing the same video clip and saying the same information as they did earlier. "Why are they saying this again dad?" she asked. I told her why - "because they have no more information yet so they just say the same thing over and over" I told her. My daughter then got up from where she was sitting, walked across the room to where I was and although there was no contest involved, she looked at me like she had beaten me in a game and grabbed the remote and changed my white noise from the Today show to something on the Disney Channel.

Can't say I missed any news though, so I suppose if it was a game, she did win didn't she?
2012-07-21 02:45:43 AM  
3 votes:
Synopsis: today's news is just a profit center for the corporations that own them, interested more with ratings than facts.
2012-07-20 11:54:18 PM  
3 votes:
Your blog doesnt suck.
2012-07-21 12:58:39 PM  
2 votes:

born_yesterday: weasil: Wow, that was a refreshing read.

Strangely, it's not so dissimilar from what I was planning to do with my 5th-grade class this fall, leading into the presidential election. Read articles, derive the slant, check the credentials, use info from publications on various sides of issues, etc.

Kids need to know how to tell the difference between when they're being informed and when they're being sold something.

I don't believe you, simply for the fact that I can't see you being allowed to do that for very long before some administrator was motivated by an irate parent to "MAKE WEASIL STOP CHALLENGING OUR WORLDVIEW!!!"


Strange thing is, I can defend myself with the California State Standards, which actually require me to teach how to discern such things, and at that grade level, too. Of course, they intended it so kids could evaluate commercials, not political rhetoric, but....

I totally expect to get crap from parents on the "other side" of whatever it is I have the kids read. I plan on telling them to pick an article they think more accurately represents the viewpoint, I'll give it to the kids, and then we can tear that apart in class, too.

Whatever, just doing my job... in as snarky a way as I can devise.
2012-07-21 09:40:06 AM  
2 votes:

ciberido: hubiestubert: To be fair, in the UK, they often opt for things that go BOOM. Often made with less than military grade goodies. Not just the IRA and political malcontents either...

starsrift: Given the additional knife control laws, it's either that, a baseball bat, or the "nuclear option" of the spork.

Why not a cricket bat?

And why a spoon, cousin?


GUN CONTROL HAS NOT STOPPED DEATHS IN PRISONS, SO OBVIOUSLY IT IS THE FAULT OF THE GUN GRABBERS!

Here's the thing: I don't think that the US' problem with homicides is going to be prevented by firmer gun control laws. It is a deeper problem than access to weapons. It is a matter of opportunity, it is a matter of culture, it is a matter of desperation on the part of many, it is a culture that alienates and separates, it is a cultural phenomenon, not just a matter of access to weapons.

If it was simply a matter of access to weapons, then the Swiss would be shooting up the damn joint, 24/7.

It's not.

There are more factors that just access to weapons that are linked to violent crime. A lot more factors. More than just drugs. More than just access. It isn't a simple problem that can be fixed by just changing one or two things. Social mobility, education, jobs, access to markets, how we treat one another, how we treat our criminals, social justice, acceptance of racial and social biases, acceptance of violence against women and minorities. A culture that talks a LOT about responsibility, but a leadership and citizens who seek to shed that responsibility because no one wants to get caught with their hand in the cookie jar. America's problems with crime aren't a simple equation that can be "fixed" by simple solutions, but we need to look at the causes, and seek to remedy those, as opposed to simply punishing and removing the tools that folks use to commit their crimes. We need to look at treating the disease that our society has, and stop looking at just the symptoms, because this bandaging the wound that is suppurating isn't really doing the trick--even if we put on a Spiderman bandage with neon stripes. Yeah, it looks cool, but the meat underneath is still rotting...
2012-07-21 03:47:04 AM  
2 votes:

unicron702: The sad truth we must all realize is that there is no way to prevent this from happening. No one could have predicted that a madman would shoot up a movie premiere.


You had me until here.

Every time someone dismisses a sniper and/or mass murderer as a "madman" or "just some crazy", those people, in their own way, enable the next sniper shooting and/or mass murder. You say "there's no way to predict this", except for the many, many prior incidents where a "madman" or "just some crazy" committed the same acts. By dismissing them as "madmen" or "just some crazies", you close the door to possible analysis and predictive capabilities of the acts themselves. And I'm not talking about the "news desk analysis" that TFA was ranting about; I'm talking about research from people trained in this kind of thing using months out of their time to help predict how someone with similar signs might do.

But no, no one could prevent or predict this. Because vigilance is hard. Placing blame and armchair analysis after the fact is easy.
2012-07-21 02:58:23 AM  
2 votes:

unicron702: A buddy just wrote this, and I have to share.

For all of you out there who may be thinking, like Congressman Gohmert, that had one or more of the members of the audience for The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado been armed that he would have been able to successfully neutralize the attack, I would like to remind you of this:

On March 21, 1981, Ronald Reagan, The President of the United States, was shot while surrounded by the best trained bodyguards on planet Earth, all of whom were armed with the very best weaponry and other equipment available. The shooter, John Hinckley, Jr., was not fired at. In fact, he got punched in the head and pulled to the ground by Alfred Antenucci, a Cleveland, Ohio, labor official, who happened to be standing near to Hinckley when he opened fire.

My point, and I say this as a supporter of the right to keep and bear arms, is that other people with guns don't necessarily equal stopping the bad guy or preventing loss of like, The Secret Service didn't open fire on Hinckley because they were in a crowd and they considered the risk of hitting innocent civilians to be too great. Again, these are some of the best trained marksmen on the planet and they think taking shots in that situation is too big of a risk. Why then do these people assume that Joe Citizen should take risks that vastly more qualified individuals would refuse to take and that said risk would pay off?

The sad truth we must all realize is that there is no way to prevent this from happening. No one could have predicted that a madman would shoot up a movie premiere. Or that a kid would shoot up his university, or a high school. There are the acts of madmen. Banning guns wouldn't have stopped it, and armed citizens in the theatre weren't likely to have stopped it either. We don't want to admit this because it's a scary truth. But remember that even though the news coverage will be constant and playing up the fear, the statistical likelihood of being caught in a shooting sp ...


I don't disagree with a lot of this.
but the reason hinckley wasn't shot dead likely had nothing to do with the fact that there were citizens around.

the likliehood is that hicnkley wasn't shot because it was all over and he was out of bullets in literally 1.7 seconds.
if the assassin was standing there unloading with a mossberg, and then switched to a hunting rifle, before pulling out a pistol, like the shooter at the batman film did, they sure as fark would have shot him no matter who was behind him (even though presumably no one was behind the shooter at teh batman film as he was at the front).

comparing the two is pretty ridiculous. not as dumb as the congressmen, but not too far off either.
they'd shoot down an aircraft flying over DC to save the president, with the massive loss of life that would entail.
the secret service isn't not going to not take a shot at a guy who is shooting at the president because granny is 3 feet next to him. so just tell your friend to quit making shiat up.
2012-07-21 02:38:29 AM  
2 votes:
Wow, that was a refreshing read.

Strangely, it's not so dissimilar from what I was planning to do with my 5th-grade class this fall, leading into the presidential election. Read articles, derive the slant, check the credentials, use info from publications on various sides of issues, etc.

Kids need to know how to tell the difference between when they're being informed and when they're being sold something.
2012-07-21 12:30:57 AM  
2 votes:
That was a refreshingly well-written piece by some guy who should write more stuff like that.
2012-07-21 10:03:54 AM  
1 vote:

James F. Campbell: hubiestubert: There are more factors that just access to weapons that are linked to violent crime. A lot more factors. More than just drugs. More than just access. It isn't a simple problem that can be fixed by just changing one or two things. Social mobility, education, jobs, access to markets, how we treat one another, how we treat our criminals, social justice, acceptance of racial and social biases, acceptance of violence against women and minorities. A culture that talks a LOT about responsibility, but a leadership and citizens who seek to shed that responsibility because no one wants to get caught with their hand in the cookie jar. America's problems with crime aren't a simple equation that can be "fixed" by simple solutions, but we need to look at the causes, and seek to remedy those, as opposed to simply punishing and removing the tools that folks use to commit their crimes. We need to look at treating the disease that our society has, and stop looking at just the symptoms, because this bandaging the wound that is suppurating isn't really doing the trick--even if we put on a Spiderman bandage with neon stripes. Yeah, it looks cool, but the meat underneath is still rotting...

I've also been working on a theory lately that what you've said -- combined with the propensity of Americans to be stupid, naive, violent, myopic, and lazy -- accounts for the popularity of comic book superhero historically and very recently.


Americans have ALWAYS been addicted to quick fixes for complex problems. In part, because we are a nation of folks who figured our best bet was to start all over with a fresh start. That has colored our thinking for a long time. Opportunity and freedom are our drugs of choice. Opportunity is the opiate of the masses, not television. EVERYONE has the opportunity to become a millionaire we are taught. Land of opportunity. That is the monomyth that our nation is founded upon.

To guarantee that freedom and that opportunity, takes some work, and most folks don't like the sort of work that it entails. It takes away from the day to day concerns. We are a nation built by farmers and intellectuals, printers and machinists, engineer and educators, but we have always somewhat feared the intelligentsia, because there is a creeping distrust in the idea that some folks might use those smarts to be MOAR equal than others. We like the myth that everyone is equal, but we'd prefer it if WE were MOAR equal, and better, and that is, in part, why we love the feet of clay stories. We like heroes, but we LOVE when they tumble and fall.

America is a B*tch Goddess sometimes, and she demands sacrifices of blood and pain. We just hate to see our own sacrificed, but damnation do we love watching others chewed up and spat out, because those are our cautionary tales. Get too uppity and the masses will tear you down, because you dared to be better. Be smarter. Be faster. Meaner. We love the idea of we can be that bigger, meaner, stronger, smarter sum'b*tch, but we don't necessarily like others to do so. Ours is a culture that needs cautionary tales, demands them. They are our faerie tales. Even our truly native faerie tales, like Paul Bunyon, all have elements of pride and fall, getting into trouble for overstepping bounds and playing with power. Ours is a culture that demands sacrifice, and bloody sacrifice at that.

We all like the tales of the Brave Pioneers. But we also huddle over the fire and revel in the cautionary tale of the Donner Party. The pioneer is the guy with the arrows in his back, and we love that portion of the myth as well. We love the idea that we got here by guts and moxy and being smarter, and we hate the idea that anyone else might do better because they're smarter and have MOAR guts and moxy, because if they get further with the same amount of moxy and guts and smarts, that might mean that they're just luckier, and that attacks the self image of that Brave Pioneer.

America is an inherently schizophrenic nation, and at some point we have to look at that, and maybe figure out how to treat it...
2012-07-21 09:52:52 AM  
1 vote:
Looks like it's only a big deal when a theatre crowd gets shot up at a mass-appeal movie and there's plenty of white folks in the crowd. If there are Cute White Girls In Peril, so much the better for the CNNs, Foxes, ABCs and NBCs of the world.

Columbine sells, Compton doesn't.

20-25 years ago, when riots, shootings, stabbings and gang fights were the norm at openings of black-targeted action movies like "Juice" and "Colors" and "Boyz N The Hood", it was meh, what do you expect, it's thugs being thugs, a few more knuckleheads are dead, no great loss there, amirite? And the band played on.

There wasn't much of a call for more gun control, that's for sure.
2012-07-21 09:43:11 AM  
1 vote:

hubiestubert: It's almost as if these folks equate: people dying=freedom.


Americans only understand negative liberty. They have no concept of positive liberty.
2012-07-21 09:30:09 AM  
1 vote:

cryinoutloud: Gdalescrboz: Well we've already introduced universal health care to the masses, might as well top if off with banning the right to bear arms while we are at it

I'll tell you the same thing I get told all the time when I make some comment about how farked up our country is--you don't like it, you can leave. I wish there was something we could do about the availability of serious firepower to all the morons of this country. But it's a little late for that, isn't it? All you paranoid gun toters have won. Quit crying about something that is a physical impossibility and will never happen, and go admire your stash--I'm sure you'll feel more like a man shortly.


This line of argumentation is actually sort of fascinating.

We have offered reasonable cost insurance to the masses, so they might as well grab our guns.

THAT'S the line of argumentation here. People can purchase reasonable cost insurance, so they might as well come get our guns, because freedom has died, because some folks might not die penniless or their kids bankrupted for their care. Because, without people dying and losing their homes because of the costs that illness can impose, there is NO freedom?

It's almost as if these folks equate: people dying=freedom. You wonder why they don't just free themselves with one of their legally purchased firearms, to complete the freedom circle. Or is it only freedom when other people die?

Gdalescrboz, do go on. Elucidate. Educate we poor unwashed with the pearls of your insight into the human condition...
2012-07-21 09:20:28 AM  
1 vote:

Smoking GNU: ok, it's early in the morning and for some reason i can't stomach coffee or any similar drink. This article is too short for my currently stunted attention span, so tl;dr. Can anyone sum it up for me, please?


Oh, you're pregnant. Congratulations.

Gdalescrboz: Well we've already introduced universal health care to the masses, might as well top if off with banning the right to bear arms while we are at it


I'll tell you the same thing I get told all the time when I make some comment about how farked up our country is--you don't like it, you can leave. I wish there was something we could do about the availability of serious firepower to all the morons of this country. But it's a little late for that, isn't it? All you paranoid gun toters have won. Quit crying about something that is a physical impossibility and will never happen, and go admire your stash--I'm sure you'll feel more like a man shortly.
2012-07-21 08:19:54 AM  
1 vote:

starsrift: BigBooper: Outlaw guns? Simple guns can be made in any machine shop. In fact, with the tools and supplies that you can buy at any big box store, you can make a functioning sub machine gun. Don't believe me? Google it, the designs are out there.

I agree with your general thrust of "Crazies be crazy, they will find a way", but you're reaching out pretty far with this one. Plenty of countries have gun controls, I've not heard of someone being frustrated at their inability to (legally) buy guns and make their own to perform their craziness with.

Generally, (for example, UK, Japan) they just go with another weapon.


To be fair, in the UK, they often opt for things that go BOOM. Often made with less than military grade goodies. Not just the IRA and political malcontents either...
2012-07-21 05:05:25 AM  
1 vote:

gwowen: Why are Americans 20 times more murderous than Britons? If you figure this out, maybe there is a way to prevent this from happening.


In 2010 the US had a homicide rate of 4.8 and the UK had a homicide rate of 1.23. That's about 4 times more murderous, not 20. Japan's was 0.36. Why are Britons 3.4 times more murderous than the Japanese?
2012-07-21 04:45:34 AM  
1 vote:

Philbb: gwowen: Why are Americans 20 times more murderous than Britons? If you figure this out, maybe there is a way to prevent this from happening.

I contend that they are not 20 times more murderous than Britons. They are just many times more successful at murderous activities than Britons. Partly due to the difference in their relationships to firearms and explosives.

/The 2nd amendment of the US Constitution ensures that that will be the case for the foreseeable future.
//Whether or not the benefit is worth the cost is an entirely different argument.


Adding to your point, per capita there are almost twice as many knife-related assaults in the UK as there are firearm-related assaults in the US. Simply put, with strict gun control laws Britons have a stab-happy culture. Knife wounds being relatively easier to treat medically, there are fewer deaths and thus lower homicide statistics in Great Britain.

I'm not a gun-lover. Note that the universal proliferation of bladed weapons has not resulted in less bladed assaults, thus refuting the argument that an armed society is a polite society. See also, Human History: Stone Ages to Enlightenment.
2012-07-21 04:29:30 AM  
1 vote:
Dear REO-Weedwagon,

Best Book in Logical Fallacy Category:

"How to Think About Weird Things: Critical Thinking for a New Age" (byTheodore Schick and Lewis Vaugh)

/cheers and luck to you in your future cognitive adventures.
2012-07-21 04:27:53 AM  
1 vote:

gwowen: Why are Americans 20 times more murderous than Britons? If you figure this out, maybe there is a way to prevent this from happening.


I contend that they are not 20 times more murderous than Britons. They are just many times more successful at murderous activities than Britons. Partly due to the difference in their relationships to firearms and explosives.

/The 2nd amendment of the US Constitution ensures that that will be the case for the foreseeable future.
//Whether or not the benefit is worth the cost is an entirely different argument.
2012-07-21 04:10:55 AM  
1 vote:
Nice read. Well written. One thing I found missing though was that the media is engaged in 24/7 propaganda against the people and they do not want people to think for themselves nor do they want to give the facts. From what I've seen when a media person (talking head, so-called reporter- that should really be called a 'reader' because that's all they do is read off a tele prompter) interrupts a guest it is a tell-tale sign that this is information they don't want you to know. Information that is outside of their agenda. And they wear ear pieces and have someone guiding the conversation which you do not see.
2012-07-21 04:06:59 AM  
1 vote:

IlGreven: unicron702: The sad truth we must all realize is that there is no way to prevent this from happening. No one could have predicted that a madman would shoot up a movie premiere.

You had me until here.

Every time someone dismisses a sniper and/or mass murderer as a "madman" or "just some crazy", those people, in their own way, enable the next sniper shooting and/or mass murder. You say "there's no way to predict this", except for the many, many prior incidents where a "madman" or "just some crazy" committed the same acts. By dismissing them as "madmen" or "just some crazies", you close the door to possible analysis and predictive capabilities of the acts themselves. And I'm not talking about the "news desk analysis" that TFA was ranting about; I'm talking about research from people trained in this kind of thing using months out of their time to help predict how someone with similar signs might do.

But no, no one could prevent or predict this. Because vigilance is hard. Placing blame and armchair analysis after the fact is easy.


On April 24, vote "Yes" on the national Pre-crime Initiative.
2012-07-21 03:56:19 AM  
1 vote:

unicron702: The sad truth we must all realize is that there is no way to prevent this from happening. No one could have predicted that a madman would shoot up a movie premiere. Or that a kid would shoot up his university, or a high school. There are the acts of madmen


So, if the answer is "a certain proportion of people are just crazy", why are these events massively more prevalent in some places than in others? Why does America breed spree shooters, why does radical Islam breed suicide bombers? The UK a country with 20% the population of the US (and a broadly similar culture and broadly similar standard of Westernised living, has around 1% of the US's firearm deaths). Even counting the Breivik murders, Norway will have a lower murder rate than the US in 2011.

Why are Americans 20 times more murderous than Britons? If you figure this out, maybe there is a way to prevent this from happening.
2012-07-21 03:18:35 AM  
1 vote:

johnscjr: Can't say I missed any news though, so I suppose if it was a game, she did win didn't she?


You both won. Her for being an intelligent young lady and you, for being a successful father
2012-07-21 03:13:51 AM  
1 vote:

Smoking GNU: ok, it's early in the morning and for some reason i can't stomach coffee or any similar drink. This article is too short for my currently stunted attention span, so tl;dr. Can anyone sum it up for me, please?


need to teach kids to filter all sources and specifically those who claim to be experts.
2012-07-21 03:09:23 AM  
1 vote:

REO-Weedwagon: He sounds like one of the pseudo-intellectual types we see on Fark who have exotic sub-categories for a fallacy. "Oh, you're committing an Inverted Heliographic Jigowatt Fallacy of Diminishing Retroactive Returns."


You know what you sound like?
2012-07-21 03:06:00 AM  
1 vote:

REO-Weedwagon: He sounds like one of the pseudo-intellectual types we see on Fark who have exotic sub-categories for a fallacy. "Oh, you're committing an Inverted Heliographic Jigowatt Fallacy of Diminishing Retroactive Returns."


.You sound retarded mentally challenged, Bless you brother.
2012-07-21 03:02:04 AM  
1 vote:

Fade2black: butt-nuggets: Metal detectors at movie houses... problem solved

The shooter came in through a back door, not through the turnstyle. Your argument is stupid, and you're stupid for saying it.


ok. so you're smart then. you win.

how about they remove the possibility of someone coming in through a back door with guns? Hard to do, yet not impossible, Einstein
2012-07-21 02:58:41 AM  
1 vote:

Laocoon: Your blog doesnt suck.


Yup.

/kinda a fan of the Jesuits
2012-07-21 02:52:39 AM  
1 vote:

butt-nuggets: Metal detectors at movie houses... problem solved


The shooter came in through a back door, not through the turnstyle. Your argument is stupid, and you're stupid for saying it.
2012-07-21 02:47:07 AM  
1 vote:
Metal detectors at movie houses... problem solved
2012-07-21 02:32:46 AM  
1 vote:
Dunno. I'm going to be glued to the tv for Ann Curry's GLORIOUS return this weekend to squeeze out every factoid about this story. The same 10 facts repeated over two hours is going to make for super duper entertaining TV. Yay News!

Loved this piece because it broke down the modern media. Are there no journalists left? Is it all about selling the story?
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report