OT: One More Off Topic Off Season Thread

[joestevens29]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830065529429643718

Gramps needs to get his vision checked.

Soon as I saw that picture I knew it was a no turn on red light. Which is funny because go there at anytime of day and people are honking or getting aggressive at people not turning

 

[Drivesaitl]

That’s all great. Still killed someone, so sounds like lots of people got it wrong. “Murder” wasn’t in his profile, but violence was. As if that’s a relevant distinction. Comes out in stressful situations too, so naturally a corn maze would be a great place. It’s pretty obvious someone screwed up here, but we can keep pretending otherwise. Dead body is the result.

Need a lot more resources and space for psychotic patients so that rolling the dice isn’t a consideration anymore. As I stated repeatedly.

You're saying they got it wrong after the fact. Which I've been pointing out all along. So that you're a couch sitter evaluating the work and assessment of professionals after the fact. You should know the fault in that logic. Nobody has that crystal ball and no diagnostic criteria ever devised can predict murder.

Your premise of a relevant distinction between aggression and murder is also wrong. Depending on population and sample anywhere from 37% or more of people have committed aggressive or violent actions at some point in their lives. Its MUCH higher in males. What % do you think commit murder? Why are you attempting equating?

You claim they "screwed up" on the basis of knowing the worst possible result.

Earlier in the exchange you were suggesting that you don't want to live at risk with individuals like this being in the community. The suggestion being (you can correct me if I'm wrong) you want any such patient locked up indefinitely because one in thousands might once do something like this.

You're barking up the wrong tree as far as safety concerns. Somebody with serious mental health conditions is more likely to be the subject of assault and serious assaults rather than being the perp. Every statistic in any domain backs this up. You're invoking standard prejudice against those that are mentally ill and attempting to spread that kind of misinformation. I won't abide that.

The individual in question had 3-4 acts of aggression that were denoted from the available information. Thats in his adult life. The last prior aggressive episode occurring 6yrs ago. The actual instances of aggression and violence by this individual were spread out and hard to predict. The individual had even had a history of requesting help when he needed it. Thats one reason why he was released into community care.

In terms of your, or anybodies personal safety you have a much greater risk from career criminals and particularly those that rob, mug, or do Break and enters. Those people are serially violent and aggressive and commit crimes and violent crimes 10-100 times the rate of a mentally ill offender. If your concern is actually community safety you would direct your concern more at our courts catch and release as it concerns criminal career offenders, and those people unlike the mentally ill having more choice in what their lives look like.

The last comment to make here is that the media sensationalizes the rare cases when a mentally ill person does kill somebody. The actual instances are rare but they get so much press and attention that we remember all of them. Several hundred people are murdered in Canada every year. Very few of them are widely reported, and very few of them are committed by mentally ill offenders. But the sensationalizing has people think that.

 

[K1984]

You're saying they got it wrong after the fact. Which I've been pointing out all along. So that you're a couch sitter evaluating the work and assessment of professionals after the fact. You should know the fault in that logic. Nobody has that crystal ball and no diagnostic criteria ever devised can predict murder.

You claim they "screwed up" on the basis of knowing the worst possible result.

Earlier in the exchange you were suggesting that you don't want to live at risk with individuals like this being in the community. The suggestion being (you can correct me if I'm wrong) you want any such patient locked up indefinitely because one in thousands might once do something like this.

You're barking up the wrong tree as far as safety concerns. Somebody with serious mental health conditions is more likely to be the subject of assault and serious assaults rather than being the perp. Every statistic in any domain backs this up. You're invoking standard prejudice against those that are mentally ill and attempting to spread that kind of misinformation. I won't abide that.

The individual in question had 3-4 acts of aggression that were denoted from the available information. Thats in his adult life. The last prior aggressive episode occurring 6yrs ago. The actual instances of aggression and violence by this individual were spread out and hard to predict. The individual had even had a history of requesting help when he needed it. Thats one reason why he was released into community care.

In terms of your, or anybodies personal safety you have a much greater risk from career criminals and particularly those that rob, mug, or do Break and enters. Those people are serially violent and aggressive and commit crimes and violent crimes 10-100 times the rate of a mentally ill offender. If your concern is actually community safety you would direct your concern more at our courts catch and release as it concerns criminal offenders, and those people unlike the mentally ill having more choice in what their lives look like.

The last comment to make here is that the media sensationalizes the rare cases when a mentally ill person does kill somebody. That actual instances are rare but they get so much press and attention that we remember all of them. Several hundred people are murdered in Canada every year. Very few of them are widely reported, and very few of them are committed by mentally ill offenders. But the sensationalizing has people think that.

I want all people that are violent and have a demonstrated and repeated history of violence to have fewer opportunities to commit violent acts than the system allows today. Whether they are mentally ill or not isn’t really relevant to me.

I don’t really care what you “abide by.” Clearly you have some sort of vested interest in defending the current system, and you can go ahead and do that. Most reasonable people would look at this situation and likely determine that a panel that says that this person is a danger to themselves and others in October 2023, and then killed someone 10 months later was probably mishandled somewhere along the way.

You can keep shouting at the clouds on this, but facts are facts. History of violent and psychotic behavior over a long period of time. Fact. Was determined a danger to himself and the public less than a year ago. Fact. Was dubiously allowed into a stressful environment as a recreational activity despite stress being a known trigger. Fact. Then he had another episode and killed someone. Fact.

That’s great that it sounds like he had a few good months after October 2023. Pretty clearly this wasn’t enough, and hopefully lessons can be learned about how the perpetrator and the victim were failed here so it doesn’t happen again.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I want all people that are violent and have a demonstrated and repeated history of violence to have fewer opportunities to commit violent acts than the system allows today. Whether they are mentally ill or not isn’t really relevant to me.

I don’t really care what you “abide by.” Clearly you have some sort of vested interest in defending the current system, and you can go ahead and do that. Most reasonable people would look at this situation and likely determine that a panel that says that this person is a danger to themselves and others in October 2023, and then killed someone 10 months later was probably mishandled somewhere along the way.

You can keep shouting at the clouds on this, but facts are facts. History of violent and psychotic behavior over a long period of time. Fact. Was determined a danger to himself and the public less than a year ago. Fact. Was dubiously allowed into a stressful environment as a recreational activity despite stress being a known trigger. Fact. Then he had another episode and killed someone. Fact.

That’s great that it sounds like he had a few good months after October 2023. Pretty clearly this wasn’t enough, and hopefully lessons can be learned about how the perpetrator and the victim were failed here so it doesn’t happen again.

So you're defining reasonable in the discussion?

Your defining facts?

jfc

 

[K1984]

So you're defining reasonable in the discussion?

Your defining facts?

jfc

I’m not defining facts. All of those are facts. I’m sorry you don’t like them.

 

[Drivesaitl]

I’m not defining facts. All of those are facts. I’m sorry you don’t like them.

You've shown zero interest in better understanding the issues. Thats on you.

I'm done with this. My replies were not just to you but to anybody reading that might pick up on some of the common distortions and misinformation. Thanks for providing the standard kneejerk tropes.

 

[K1984]

You've shown zero interest in better understanding the issues. Thats on you.

I'm done with this. My replies were not just to you but to anybody reading that might pick up on some of the common distortions and misinformation. Thanks for providing the standard kneejerk tropes.

The gall of questioning how someone determined a danger to themselves and the public was put in a position to kill someone.

Conversely, you’re demonstrating the crux of the issue. “Nothing to see over here because some people dubiously determined he actually was fine.”

The fact that he wasn’t, and this was a failure is secondary to protecting the sanctity of the system apparently. When systems break, people often look at the cause to prevent the same thing from happening again. Not here though in your view, apparently.

 

[bellagiobob]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830355521360072932

 

[K1984]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830355521360072932

Ted Scott couldn’t have picked a better time to leave Bubba Watson’s bag and take Scotty’s.

Bubba would probably be teetering on the brink of losing his card if he still played on the big tour.

 

[SupremeTeam16]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830355521360072932

I’ve been to probably about 10-15 PGA and LIV events over the past few years and one of the most fascinating things is seeing player/caddy relationships up close. It’s absolutely vital to success and while Scheff is an incredibly talented golfer, I don’t think he would be having the kind of success he’s having without that partnership with TS.

 

[bellagiobob]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830319092437303538

 

[rboomercat90]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830319092437303538

I’m seeing a lot of mocking in this video.

 

[Stoneman89]

I’m seeing a lot of mocking in this video.

Only thing worse than a pesky groundhog is a smartass groundhog.

 

[rboomercat90]

Only thing worse than a pesky groundhog is a smartass groundhog.

If he ever learns how to give the finger he’s gonna be a real problem.

 

[bellagiobob]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1831320223732871455

Very true

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Gotta love those Goodyear bias ply tires.

 

[joestevens29]

Gotta love those Goodyear bias ply tires.

Car looks like they started to build a full size one and then ran out of steel during production.

Either that or someone chopped their station wagon as they were sick of taking the whole soccer team to practice.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Gotta love those Goodyear bias ply tires.

Random trivia but thats the same "prick" car that Mike Damone drove in Fast times while going places to scalp tickets and look for trim.

That is one of the worst f***ing cars ever invented. The model of that car would last longer than the real thing and probably more durable.

But a special horror story is the backseats. The design of this so ridiculous that there were even back seats in this vehicle with approximately 6 inches, lol, of leg room. It was like being in the trunk of a car and no back door of course, and no back window, of course, and no way to exit from these deathtraps unless the people in front let you exit.

I would only run shotgun in one of these. I wouldn't drive one because I would never own one, and if given only the backseat choice its ":sorry, I'd rather walk".

These vehicles shouldn't even have been allowed to exist.

 

[Drivesaitl]

Car looks like they started to build a full size one and then ran out of steel during production.

Either that or someone chopped their station wagon as they were sick of taking the whole soccer team to practice.

The AMC Gremlin was literally the AMC Hornet with some of the back chopped off. It was a cheap "compact" that wasn't on a compact frame and it had the rather odd 6 Cylinder engine for a compact car. It was an emergency ploy by AMC to try to stay in business in the midst of fuel efficient compact cars being sold in the middle of a US gas crisis. AMC had previously been caught making some gas guzzlers which were generally horrible vehicles anyway.

The Gremlin was its own kind of horror story. Any company that made that deserved to go belly up.

You can just envision the "American Motors Corporation" boardroom vision. "hey, all the fuel efficient compacts are capturing the US market, we need to make a compact quick without designing one. " Somebody in back, a Janitor says just chop the Hornet in half and that'll be a compact" and thats lol what they basically did. I only added in the janitor, sorry, custodial engineer.

America should've sued for usage of the name of the country. <sarcasm>

 

[brentashton]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1830319092437303538

Paging Carl Spackler. Please bring the C4.

But a special horror story is the backseats. The design of this so ridiculous that there were even back seats in this vehicle with approximately 6 inches, lol, of leg room. It was like being in the trunk of a car and no back door of course, and no back window, of course, and no way to exit from these deathtraps unless the people in front let you exit.

.

Wasn’t that the marketing slogan for the Ford Pinto?

 

[brentashton]

Gotta love those Goodyear bias ply tires.

Saw this at Barret Jackson a few years ago. Fits with the hockey theme of the site.

 

[rboomercat90]

Gotta love those Goodyear bias ply tires.

Many of the kids I went to high school with that “self-identified” as cool drove these.

 

[5 Mins 4 Ftg]

Many of the kids I went to high school with that “self-identified” as cool drove these.

You just cannot identify as cool driving a Gremlin.

 

[rboomercat90]

You just cannot identify as cool driving a Gremlin.

You should know by now that you can “self-identify” as anything you’d like to. Doesn’t mean others see you the same way.

 

[brentashton]

Random trivia but thats the same "prick" car that Mike Damone drove in Fast times while going places to scalp tickets and look for trim.

That is one of the worst f***ing cars ever invented. The model of that car would last longer than the real thing and probably more durable.

But a special horror story is the backseats. The design of this so ridiculous that there were even back seats in this vehicle with approximately 6 inches, lol, of leg room. It was like being in the trunk of a car and no back door of course, and no back window, of course, and no way to exit from these deathtraps unless the people in front let you exit.

I would only run shotgun in one of these. I wouldn't drive one because I would never own one, and if given only the backseat choice its ":sorry, I'd rather walk".

These vehicles shouldn't even have been allowed to exist.

Lol. Man you really are a man of the 70s. I haven’t heard that “lady chasing” terminology for years. Ha ha.