Quote by Ironic
Not only does that make sense, but they're also possible to enact, unlike the chances of a constitutional amendment.
If your plan in this thread is to keep meandering about red flag laws, please start another thread. The filibustering act between you and the same parties has grown stale. Thanks.
Quote by Magical_felix
He was actually on a list already and had been to a mental facility before the shooting. Talked about hearing voices and threatened to do a mass shooting… but like, the constitution or whatever.
Yeah, but after his mental health stint, he was cleared to re-enter society according to medical and legal terms (because that's how mental health holds/releases work), meaning he was no longer a red flag. Crisis averted and all that, no need to even keep an eye on him.
That's the loophole to the whole red flag thing.
Quote by noll
What productive proposal do you have?
Scroll above. He wants to lobby for more good guys with guns to stop shooters, despite the fact that this shooter was once a good guy with a gun.
Not only that, red flag laws are supposed to take away guns from people who shouldn't have them. Only problem with that is that people become red flags after the damage has been done. Case in point: The guy who's the topic of this thread only became a red flag once he went on a mass shooting spree. Before that, he was an upstanding citizen of no concern who even taught gun safety. Womp womp.
Quote by ElCoco
Maybe someday, when you try to get into a university, you'll wish your standardized test scores were high like mine were.
Not only is this one of the saddest things I've ever read on the internet, it's also irrelevant to the topic at hand. Please stay on track. Thanks.
Quote by Buz
A lot of standardized tests are bunk anyhow.
Yep. I promise no college, trade school, job, etc. cares about whatever state-level standardized test high schoolers have to take to graduate. Most private schools don't require them at all. Many colleges are doing away with the GRE, SAT, ACT, etc. exams as required for entry into their programs because statistically and generally speaking, they’re just not an indicator of how well someone is going to perform academically. Plus lots of them have been found to be biased against, you guessed it, marginalized communities. What ends up happening when standardized test become, well, the standard for curriculums is that school districts focus on teaching students how to pass the test instead of finding more productive ways to demonstrate learning outcomes and actually maintain them post-graduation.
I took the ACT and SAT with no prep, and scored just enough to have the minimum scores to be accepted into my top 3, so I didn't try for a higher score, which is what others often do to get closer to their desired outcome. Neither of them were my peak academic performances. There are people I know for a fact who were higher academic achievers than me (and I’m a fucking high academic achiever myself), some even tutored me, but just weren’t the best test-takers, so actually scored lower than me. The standardized tests mean fuck-all.
Holy misrepresentation of information.
They've found that some of the ways they were implementing assessments were discriminatory in nature, so they're seeking to correct that. Quote from the article: "“We haven’t suspended any sort of assessments,” state board member Vicky López Sánchez, a dean at Portland Community College, said during a recent board of education meeting. “The only thing we are suspending is the inappropriate use of how those assessments were being used. I think that really is in the best interest of Oregon students.”
They're not suspending all requirements, just standardized testing as a requirement for graduation. They're even still administering standardized tests, but not using them as the benchmark for whether or not a student graduates, being that they found them to be discriminatory, and don't improve outcomes after graduation. They're moving towards better ways to assure that students are prepared post-graduation, and not just passing arbitrary tests that are unequally yoked, and have no bearings on their preparedness/success going forward. There's still an evaluative process in those areas that takes place for graduation, meaning there are still requirements for graduation. Just not discriminatory/irrelevant ones.
Quote by Chryses
Try NEWS reporting organizations that are not American.
Here are two examples: BBC World News, Aljazeera
Quote by Ironic
With links to your sources, and that aren't owned by American or even Western billionaires.
But print journalism has gone.
Newspapers and magazines that are now owned by billionaires:
The Washington Post; owned by Jeff Bezos
The Boston Globe; owned by John Henry
The Star Tribune; owned by Glen Taylor
Los Angeles Times; owned by Patrick Soon-Shiong
Time; owned by Marc Benioff
The Atlantic; owned by Laurene Powell Jobs
Fortune; owned by Chatchaval Jiaravanon
Murdoch family media empire includes: cable TV channel Fox News (not a print source, but still notable), and newspapers The Times of London, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post
Mind you, these aren't all of them, just the major ones. There are many others, proving in large that the majority of major print news media is indeed owned by billionaires.
Source found here. I found this all by typing the following into Google: print journalism owned by multi billionaires.
Please stop wasting people's time with demanding easily accessible sources to widely known information in order to sidestep engaging with information that challenges your views. It’s a shit tactic. Thanks.
Quote by Chryses
That is unnecessary. If the data and the analysis are valid, there is no need for a provocative title. Let the thing speak for itself. Note that the criticism has focused on people and social conventions, not the data or the analysis.
edited
Nah, there was criticism of the data as well. What’s notable is titling a discussion paper “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?” and then not including any data about greenhouse gas emissions in the statistical model…you know, the standard by which data is collected and analyzed.
Quote by Chryses
Some people react strongly to contradictory reports.
This statement would hold true if I were reacting to a report (or if I were reacting at all since disputing content with facts isn’t the same as reacting). But since it was a non-credible discussion paper, your point, much like the poorly-researched and intentionally misleading discussion you introduced to this conversation, is moot.
With this all being said, I accept that since facts are not on your side, you’ve lowered yourself to diminishing my fact-based response to a mere reaction. Pathetic, but par for the course for the likes of you. Cheers.
Quote by Chryses
Statistics Norway, the government agency that produces official statistics for that country, released a report last month titled “To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?” The report concludes:
In other words, the results imply that the effect of man-made CO2 emissions does not appear to be sufficiently strong to cause systematic changes in the pattern of the temperature fluctuations. In other words, our analysis indicates that with the current level of knowledge, it seems impossible to determine how much of the temperature increase is due to emissions of CO2.
It's worth noting that this isn't a report. It's not an article. It's not a publication. It's a discussion paper (different level of credibility in the world of research) that hasn't even been peer reviewed (which again, if your findings aren't peer-reviewed, they're worthless and are not credible). Neither of the authors have PhDs. One of them is an engineer, and the other, while affiliated with the National Bureau of Statistics, the research director at said bureau has stated that the conclusions reached in this discussion paper do not reflect the bureau's views on climate change. This isn't even a scientific manuscript.
Now let's get into this discussion. The authors regurgitate several points from "The Cold Sun" written by Fritz Vahrenholt, a German ex-politician, in 2012. In said book, he posited that the solar cycle determines the climate of the planet. The book was debunked due to a biased presentation of the included literature, which was misquoted by Vahrenholt. He infamously predicted/concluded in his book that global temperatures would plummet in 2020 and continue to do so. Which we all know isn't the case. The authors in the discussion you've included above disingenuously excluded this while centering Vahrenholt's work in their discussion. Even their title question is "To what extent are temperature levels changing due to greenhouse gas emissions?" yet their statistical model doesn't even include any data related to greenhouse gases, lol.
More info found here. Before this information is dismissed as being just a blog post, keep in mind that because the original work posted is a non-peer-reviewed discussion paper, the blog post is actually more credible. Again, lol.
Quote by Buz
Wow! Trump can't have a single thought about anything without connecting it to himself. Trump's narcissism has no limits.
It's just one of his many political gambits. He knows his target audience well enough to be able to scam them for their votes. "These bad things are happening because everyone is out to get me, the one who fights for your freedom. This is why you must vote for me. These consequences that are happening as a direct result of my shit actions are just a way to rob you of your freedoms that I fight so hard for, despite not showing you any substantial proof of me doing so."
The usual idiots fall for it. If you're not falling for it, it's because you are not idiotic enough to be his target audience. Congrats.
Quote by Ironic
A joint blockade? With who?
You're acting as if Israel has never allowed food, fuel, power, or any other basic living needs to enter Gaza, and you're wrong about that too.
If Hamas hadn't attacked Israel, it's likely none of the bombing or retaliation would have happened.
If Israel hadn't been terrorizing Palestine for the last several decades, the Hamas attack wouldn't have happened.
Quote by Ironic
“This article is republished here with permission from The Conversation. This content is shared here because the topic may interest Snopes readers; it does not, however, represent the work of Snopes fact-checkers or editors.“
This is pedantic. Snopes shared this content because they endorse it, otherwise they wouldn't have shared it with their readers. Please stop this. I won't ask again. Thank you.
Stop me if you've heard this before, but here goes: I have yet again had to remove several posts by ElCoco & Ironic due to the usual pedantic "debate" tactic that centers redirecting actual discussion of the topic at hand. I will not do so again. I will simply lock the thread.
Being that Target closing 9 of their stores (citing retail theft & organized retail crime) was the catalyst for this thread, I think it's important to note that these headlines have been all over the place, but with no data. Journalist/lawyer Judd Leggum did some digging and found the following:
1. Target is closing the store at 517 East 117th Street in Harlem. But according to NYPD data, there were fewer incidents of shoplifting this year at the Harlem store than other nearby stores that will remain open.
2. Target is also closing its location on Folsom Street in San Francisco. But according to SFDP data, there were fewer incidents of shoplifting in and around that store than other nearby stores that will remain open.
3. The Seattle Times did a similar analysis of stores in the Seattle area and found there were fewer police incidents in and around the two stores being closed than other nearby stores that will remain open.
4. All of this data suggests there were other reasons beyond shoplifting driving Target's decision to close stores. In June, Target's CEO said it was saddled with lots of unwanted merchandise that it was forced to deeply discount, cutting profits.
Target and large retailers like it put out similar press waves when they're closing stores, but rarely (read: never) have the crime data to substantiate these claims.
Quote by AmuseBouche
I would have thought a country as massive as the US would benefit from this too.
It would, but as always any self-defeating decisions or lack of decision-making when it comes to systems and structures in the US can always be traced to those lining the pockets of politicians who refuse to act in the best interests of this country and its people.
Quote by RowanThorn
It’s dismissive at best, intentionally playing dumb at worse.
You’ve reached the crux of the matter. Playing obtuse is all you’ll get from him and the two other posters like him. I strongly encourage you to take your genuine arguments elsewhere. They’re wasted on this lot.
