Credibility measured by actions. And outwards impressions of the people testifying.
15+ Dead In Texas School Shooting; 18-y.o. student Salvador Ramos Identified As Shooter
- Thread starter Gondwanaland
- Start date
Yeah and Stevie wonder can't see the color of my shirt but that's not a result of my inability to describe it or the shirt itself. The deficiency is elsewhere. BTW it's not my opinion that most physically and mentally healthy people would rather be alive than dead.
Gondwanaland
Well-known member
Mass Shootings by Country 2023
worldpopulationreview.com
And stating something is discredited is meaningless.
Nope. Traffic accidents is the leading cause of death for American children. Then followed by firearms and then ONLY if one is including suicides.
Gondwanaland
Well-known member
Actually that's how most liberals I know from California (especially those who live there) describe it.
Well remember that for the left "sincere belief" makes things true.
As determined (given) according to the subjective opinion of others. If it can be justifiably taken how does it belong to you?
Objectively- my coming into existence wasn't determined by others' subjective opinion, therefore......
Temujin
Well-known member
Yes.
Temujin
Well-known member
Most people want to maintain their life. Agreed. Deliberately taking that life away against their will harms them. For those people (the vast majority) who think that causing harm is morally wrong, then deliberately taking life is immoral. But to be immoral it needs someone to think that it is. There is no objectivity in the immorality, just in the fact that a lot of people think it is immoral. This is more obvious in a moral controversy that is not almost universally held. Eating meat, for example. Do you think that eating meat is immoral or moral? Is this opinion objectively true, or just your opinion? Perhaps you view only moral decisions involving life and death to be objective? Is that the case? I am not trying to trick you here, I'm genuinely interested and appreciate this more reasonable exchange.
So, to you, there is no outside standard, other than your own thoughts, to judge what is moral or not.
Temujin
Well-known member
As part of the process of forming my own opinion, I would of course consider what other people think and the reason they give for thinking it. It isn't just an arbitrary guess. So, no, it isn't just my own thoughts, but also the thoughts of those around me and the experiences and upbringing I have received.
But to take mankind as a whole, I am still correct.
Let looks at a scenario. We have a closed society of 1005 people. 505 men and 500 women. They have a fulling functioning closed society with zero outside contact or needs. The society is governed as a pure democracy. All decisions are decided by a vote of all 1005 people. Someone puts forward a law that says that any man an demand that any women submits to sex whenever the man requests. They vote and the law passes 505 to 500.
In your line of thinking, because the majority accept it, such a law is now moral.
Temujin
Well-known member
No. Nowhere have I at any time said this. Nor do I think it is true. The most that can be said is that a majority of people thinks it is moral, though that hasn't been shown. Your population of men are very unrepresentative of humanity as I know it. Each person's view of this law will be individual. Most women would presumably think it is immoral. Some women may submit gladly. Some men might be uneasy. The whole scenario is very unrealistic.
Change the scenario slightly. Make the proposed law be about abortion. What it says is irrelevant. That the majority thinks that abortion should be legal or illegal is irrelevant to the morality, which remains a personal opinion. All you can say is that abortion is permitted or not permitted, irrespective of the moral views of each individual.
Causing harm is a moral wrong as most people prefer not being harmed. That someone "thinks" something is immoral is an expression of the experience of being harmed. The thinking doesn't make it immoral. It is immoral and we think it when we experience it. I might suggest thinking more about "thinking" if that makes sense.
No taking something that isnt yours is immoral because it too causes harm and rarely do people like having things taken from them. So no it's not just life and death.
As to the eating of beef it's not immoral even though some see it that way. Making a cow suffer pain in the process turning it into steak is immoral. That's why they shouldn't kill cattle as quickly.as possible so as not to prolong it's suffering. The problem is people want to put an animals life on an equal footing with humans and they are no even in the same universe together.
Harry Leggs
Super Member
It sounds like onlookers are angry at the police for mishandling the school shooting situation. Similar to Parkland high school and Nikolas Cruz
reason.com
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces to blame, the only real villain in the shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school that left more than 20 people dead was the shooter himself. But I was wrong. Video and witness accounts from outside Uvalde's Robb Elementary School suggest local police officers not only failed to try and stop the shooter for an unconscionably long time but also actively prevented parents from trying to save their kids.
The shooter—Salvador Ramos—was inside the school for 40 minutes or more while police stood around outside, the Associated Press reports. "Frustrated onlookers urged police officers to charge into the Texas elementary school," but the officers reportedly waited outside until a SWAT team was ready.
------------------------------
Figured that yesterday as did Yakuda.
Witnesses, Video Suggest Stunning Inaction From Uvalde Cops During School Shooting
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces...
reason.com
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces to blame, the only real villain in the shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school that left more than 20 people dead was the shooter himself. But I was wrong. Video and witness accounts from outside Uvalde's Robb Elementary School suggest local police officers not only failed to try and stop the shooter for an unconscionably long time but also actively prevented parents from trying to save their kids.
The shooter—Salvador Ramos—was inside the school for 40 minutes or more while police stood around outside, the Associated Press reports. "Frustrated onlookers urged police officers to charge into the Texas elementary school," but the officers reportedly waited outside until a SWAT team was ready.
------------------------------
Figured that yesterday as did Yakuda.
Words have which meaning. Man used to mean one thing, now? No so much.
Wait!?? Cops waited outside? What is that line from? Oh I see it sorry.It sounds like onlookers are angry at the police for mishandling the school shooting situation. Similar to Parkland high school and Nikolas Cruz
Witnesses, Video Suggest Stunning Inaction From Uvalde Cops During School Shooting
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces...
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces to blame, the only real villain in the shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school that left more than 20 people dead was the shooter himself. But I was wrong. Video and witness accounts from outside Uvalde's Robb Elementary School suggest local police officers not only failed to try and stop the shooter for an unconscionably long time but also actively prevented parents from trying to save their kids.
The shooter—Salvador Ramos—was inside the school for 40 minutes or more while police stood around outside, the Associated Press reports. "Frustrated onlookers urged police officers to charge into the Texas elementary school," but the officers reportedly waited outside until a SWAT team was ready.
If this is true then every cop there should be charged with accessory to murder. Ridiculous
Harry Leggs
Super Member
You had it pegged yesterday as i recall. We were both wondering about that
Wait!?? Cops waited outside? What is that line fromIt sounds like onlookers are angry at the police for mishandling the school shooting situation. Similar to Parkland high school and Nikolas Cruz
Witnesses, Video Suggest Stunning Inaction From Uvalde Cops During School Shooting
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces...
Cops waited outside while shooter killed students. In yesterday's Roundup, I suggested that while everyone was looking for larger forces to blame, the only real villain in the shooting at a Uvalde, Texas, elementary school that left more than 20 people dead was the shooter himself. But I was wrong. Video and witness accounts from outside Uvalde's Robb Elementary School suggest local police officers not only failed to try and stop the shooter for an unconscionably long time but also actively prevented parents from trying to save their kids.
The shooter—Salvador Ramos—was inside the school for 40 minutes or more while police stood around outside, the Associated Press reports. "Frustrated onlookers urged police officers to charge into the Texas elementary school," but the officers reportedly waited outside until a SWAT team was ready.
Yes indeed.
Harry Leggs
Super Member
That is why we need guns because when push comes to shove cannot depend on cops. It happened at Parkland and now here. Armed citizens could have stormed the school while the cop screwed the pooch outside.
I could agree more. That's why I love sheriff Grady Judd