• RSS
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
bito On January - 17 - 2013

The place to post your comments without interrupting the single topic posts. However, be mindful of the strict rules!!

If you find the rules here are too confining, try the Morning Blog.

YOU MAY ONLY POST COMMENTS HERE IF:

THEY ARE OFF TOPIC, TO POST LINKS TO ARTICLES, TO COMMENT, TO SAY HELLO, TO HAVE A DIALOG, TO POST A VIDEO, TO PLAY, TO ASK QUESTIONS, TO HAVE OPINIONS, TO DISCUSS, TO POST KITTIES/PUPPIES/CARTOONS, TO TELL JOKES AND STORIES,

AND A BUNCH OF OTHER STUFF I CAN’T THINK OF RIGHT NOW.

BUT ABSOLUTELY, NO SPITTING, EYE GOUGING OR HITTING ABOVE OR BELOW THE BELT!!

You know the rules, now follow them! Please?

Every so often I intrude TO/OT with a personal pick of a site that I find important that I feel needs to be shared and not lost in the shuffle of the constant flow of thoughts on The Planet.

And yet with globalization, we seem to have developed a strange apprehension about the efficacy of our ability to apply the innovation and hard work necessary to successfully compete in a complex security and economic environment. Further, we have misunderstood interdependence as a weakness rather than recognizing it as a strength. The key to sustaining our competitive edge, at home or on the world stage, is credibility — and credibility is a difficult capital to foster. It cannot be won through intimidation and threat, it cannot be sustained through protectionism or exclusion. Credibility requires engagement, strength, and reliability — imaginatively applied through the national tools of development, diplomacy, and defense.

The Y Article

A National Security Narrative

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

H/T AB

Written by bito

Was once a handsome frog until kissed by an ugly corporate princess.----- Like a well honed knife, the internet can be a wonderful and useful tool. It can be used to prepare and serve a delicious meal or it can be used to cause harm. peace

12,948 Responses so far.

Click here to leave a comment
  1. AdLib says:

    Can we say now without fear of contradiction that the MSM news has jumped the shark? Chris Matthews lead story today was all about Hillary running for President in 2016 and asking, “Why are we hearing so much about Hillary running for President?”

    Tomorrow on Hardball, “Predictions by Chris Mathews on why his predictions will all be wrong.”

  2. Nirek says:

    The Affordable care Act aka Obamacare is not perfect. After all the GOPers put their pieces into it. Still imperfect as it is (can be made better) it insures that all Americans can get health care.
    Like our judicial system, it is not perfect but it is the best in the world. The best thing is it can be improved in the future.

    To unfund it is to take health care away from the people who can least afford to lose it.

    Why is it that the GOP/TP wants to do away with the ACA? Why do they want to hurt thousands of Americans?

    • AdLib says:

      Nirek, I think the main reason the Repubs want Obamacare to fail is to destroy Obama’s legacy and return obscene profits to insurance companies who back their elections.

      Don’t forget that much of Obamacare comes from Republican proposals that they suddenly turned around to oppose just because Obama proposed them. So it truly can’t be policy issues.

      Though the Baggers do want to destroy every safety net and social policy program so they can greedily keep all their money and not have to pay taxes. They would want Americans of all kinds, including seniors, to be starving and on the streets and dying from health issues just to satisfy themselves that their greed prevailed. Meanwhile, they are so full of hatred and so lacking in awareness, they fail to realize that they would be among the homeless, hungry and uninsured.

      • Nirek says:

        Ad, you’re right as usual. The comparing our judicial system to the ACA point I made was to say that we would rather not have any man, woman , or child slip through the cracks. Every American deserves health care.

    • Kalima says:

      Hi Nirek. Firstly because it’s the president’s greatest achievement, he did what no one else could do in over 40 years. Once it takes full effect, the Repubs lose just about everything because their lies about Obamacare will be exposed for all to see.

      Then of course they love money above all else, their Jesus has a dollar sign engraved on his forehead and a semi-automatic in his hands instead if a cross. They have to make the insurance companies and Big Pharma rich in order to continue to get the bribe money from them. Republicans without money are like fish out of water.

      If anyone still supporting them thinks that they care about anything other than power and money, they need a brain transplant. I can almost hear the howling when some of these voters find out that they can’t get healthcare because their governor refuses to implement Obamacare in their state. Bye bye Governor “What’shisname”.

  3. Nirek says:

    Warning , another rant WARNING!

    Anyone who is an honest law abiding citizen will agree that racists and those who abuse women or children are wrong. That said, why does anyone condone these politicians who are blatant racists or willing to hurt women? They are wrong, wrong, WRONG!

    Every time one of them says a racist thing we need to shine a spotlight on them ! When they want to treat women like second class citizens, SHINE that spot light on them!

    • AdLib says:

      Nirek, the sad fact is that many don’t criticize them because…they agree and are also racist. Other pols, especially on the Right are afraid of being attacked by the Tea Party types who are racist and seek to primary any Repub that doesn’t toe their racist line.

      Dems and other fair mind people do speak out against such statements and people, just don’t expect any Repubs to do so.

      • Nirek says:

        Ad, that is exactly why we all have to speak up against racists. They are WRONG and we have to shout it from on high that discrimination is WRONG!

    • kesmarn says:

      Frennie! This is worth the price of admission for this alone:

      Cruz combines Ron Paul’s outsider status, Rick Perry’s yee-haw conservatism, Rick Santorum’s Leviticus literalism, Marco Rubio’s Hispanic-but-not-Mexican tokenism, Newt Gingrich’s presumed intelligence, and Mitt Romney’s smug self-satisfaction and feigned, raised-eyebrow humility.

      Underneath this dream team of attributes, behind his articulate, composed visage, however, beats the heart of someone happy to call himself crazy.

      Great stuff!

    • Nirek says:

      AB, you are correct that it is funny.
      This guy is a crackpot!

      “Here’s what we knew before he got elected: He thinks George Soros is leading a United Nations plot to take away our golf courses, ranches and paved roads. He called Social Security a “Ponzi scheme.” And even though he should have known—as a former University of Texas law professor—that Acts of Congress “shall be the supreme law of the land,” he said that Texas and other states could circumvent the president by nullifying Obamacare. If this sounds a little nuts, you’re right.”

      That paragraph says a lot. Cruz is a former law professor ?

      Thank God Texas has people like you to offset the weird ones like Cruz.

      • AlphaBitch says:

        Aw, Nirek! Just got up and saw your comment. There’s a whole bunch of us here in TX. I think we just got sucker punched when W. beat Ann for Governor and threw up our hands in disgust/pure disbelief. Now we are coming out swinging.

        Yesterday, here in San Antonio, I drove under an overpass which featured many people holding “IMPEACH OBAMA” signs off the overpass. A few people honked. I rolled down the window with a thumbs down. I considered calling the police to say it was a traffic hazard/distraction (on I-35, no less) and to come do something about it. I decided that instead, on my return trip, as traffic crawled to a stop, I would roll down my window, shoot ’em the finger, and scream at the top of my drill sargent lungs, “FOR WHAT?????” followed by something kind (like ‘Who’s your daddy? Ted Cruz???”). They were not there on return, however, and I do remember doing something similar when W. was in the White House. So I went to see the Butler, sat next to a group of too-funny African American women (their side bars cracked me up during the movie, and when I cried, they cried, too) and got over it. Now it’s time to get back to work on turning TX blue. No time to worry about banners and stuff. That’s child’s play. We’re doing “big girl panties” type stuff now.

        But thanks, and I’ll keep you guys posted.

  4. Kalima says:

    I laughed, but if the shoe fits, and it does, let’s throw it at the Repubs. They never read the bills anyway unless it’s about restricting abortion.

    It might be from “The Onion” but it’s not really that far fetched.

    “Congress Fiercely Divided Over Completely Blank Bill That Says And Does Nothing”

    http://www.theonion.com/articles/congress-fiercely-divided-over-completely-blank-bi,33256/

  5. Nirek says:

    America has so many laws on the books. How do we get rid of the laws that are wrong, out dated, or duplicitous?

    Congress makes laws but never seem to get rid of the old law that is replaced. The IRS has so many contradicting rules and they never get rid of the old superseded rule or law.

    Just mulling these thoughts over. Comments welcome.

    • choicelady says:

      When we had legislators who actually knew the laws, some of this did not happen. Today we have ego-driven people who know nothing of the law, so it happens way too often as kes noted below about restraints. Some of it is funny -- laws that are archaic and never contradicted by new law -- but some is dangerous. I don’t think every legislator has to be an attorney, but it never hurts to have ALL legislators respectful of the law, willing to do the vetting on previous laws, and willing either to stop new, stupid laws or including an over-ride of outmoded stuff. Now we have people in the Tea Party who understand NOTHING, not even the Constitution. Not good.

    • kesmarn says:

      Nirek, I hear you. And sometimes when it comes to laws it becomes a darned-if-you-do darned-if-you-don’t situation. In nursing, for example, you can be sued if you apply restraints to a patient, and you can be sued if you don’t! It vaguely depends on the situation — but not even that is well-defined.

      • Nirek says:

        Kes, my wife is an RN and has told me exactly what you said. It is a damned if you do and damned if you don’t in several situations.

  6. choicelady says:

    This morning’s tweet from our site about the Raw Story article on the trial of Scott Lively brought joy to my heart! I started that ball rolling with the attorney, Pam Spees, who is seeing it through. We were both on a UN panel on human rights with respect to LGBT issues, and I urged her to pursue this tactic which she eagerly did. If I never do anything else in my life, this will make me glad I lived. She positively rocks, and I’m honored she thought my suggestion worth the doing.

    • kesmarn says:

      Wow…c’lady! That is so cool. I got the original story from our amazing SueinCa and merely passed it on.

      SO proud of you for the role you played in getting the ball rolling on this!

      • choicelady says:

        Thank you, kes! Pam is a genius at knowing what laws work and how, and she built this case brick by brick from that UN meeting on. If anyone can bring Scott Lively to justice, it would be Pam. I am so glad I got a chance to meet her!

    • AdLib says:

      Very cool, CL! I am always both surprised and not surprised when I find that you have contributed to yet another meaningful action!

      So glad to hear from your first hand knowledge about how solid and sharp Pam Spees is.

      A conviction would be a real big win for human rights and against the Dominionists and Christian Extremists. Go Pam!

      • choicelady says:

        Indeed -- GO PAM!!! She’s a tiny, quiet woman with a mind and heat as big as the world. Her devotion to human rights is without reservation, and her knowledge of international human rights laws is without peer. We had this conversation privately and within the group. I urged her and her organization to act on exactly these issues. I am agog that it was a step they could take and are taking. Wow. MAJOR good thing!

  7. Three year old shoots dad in the ass.

    http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/entry/arizona-tot-shoots-pop-in-butt?ref=fpb

    All I can say is Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

    • AdLib says:

      The only thing that stops a bad ass with a gun is a good ass with a gun.

      • I guess pops will be standing for quite some time to come! This reminds me of a great line from Blazing Saddles when Wilder’s character is explaining why he became a drunk. He says, “then one day someone said turn around and draw. I turned around and it was a six year old kid. I turned back around and kept walking and the little bastard shot me in the ass!” Too funny.

    • kesmarn says:

      Well, that bullet is something that will stick in pop’s mind, I imagine, considering where it lodged.

      Nice parenting — letting a 3 year-old get his hands on a loaded gun.

      There seems to be at least one story like this a day, lately!

  8. kesmarn says:

    Speaking of creepy. Thanks to our Sue, I found a photo essay in Slate that goes inside the KKK (even though we’re in the post-racial era.)

    How’s this for an image? Here is Carl taking aim at a giant cockroach while the rest of the family is cringing in the background hoping there’s no ricochet from that shot.

    [img][/img]

    For the rest of this sad tale:

    http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2013/08/13/anthony_s_karen_a_photojournalist_s_unrestricted_access_to_the_ku_klux_klan.html

    • SallyT says:

      The sad thing about this, Kes, is that the Republican Party could careless about these people. Most look like they have been on or are still on government assistance. After getting their votes, the Republicans are going to kick them to the curb, cockroaches and all! Then these stupid people are going to blame the government still and not ever catch on that they put them in office to destroy the needs of the people. Another reason that the Repugs wants to keep them uneducated.

      • kesmarn says:

        You are so right, Sally. They manipulate these people (and with their KKK affiliation, they know exactly which dog whistle words to use) and then abandon them. But not before having a good laugh at their expense.

        And like a not-too-smart but loyal dog, these poor folks will lick the hand of the abusive owner who beats them. It is tragic.

      • AdLib says:

        Sally, so true, the Republicans exploit these people, deceive them about their true motivations then once they get elected, they try to cut the funding for the very programs these people depend on.

        Look at their attempt to whip these people up against Obamacare right now, they are saying point blank, “Help us stop Obama from giving you health care!” And the ignorant poor people who follow their leaders on this, if they succeeded then an uninsured follower found out the next day they had cancer, the Repubs would just turn their backs and ignore them.

        It’s one thing to be poorly educated, it’s another thing to be blind. I sure hope there’s a bit of an awakening with some of these people to the scam the GOP is pulling on them but some are just too far gone.

    • AdLib says:

      Isn’t this guy Ted Cruz’s campaign manager?

    • Definitely a meth head. Look how emaciated this nut is. White supremacists love their meth.

  9. AdLib says:

    Just saw some video of the Powerball lottery winners in NJ and it felt a little creepy. The people who won are regular folk, so happy as they should be, hosted by a spokeswoman for the state lottery who seemed pleasant enough.

    It was the overall presentation that felt creepy to me. It was in fact a promotional event for the lottery as the way people can solve their problems, live a life of happiness and climb out of the financial hole they’re in.

    The odds of winning Powerball are 1 in 175,223,510 but watching this press conference, it seems like it’s just a matter of time until many people will win it.

    I completely appreciate the fun fantasy of buying a ticket and possibly waking up the next morning a multimillionaire, I’ve got nothing against people getting a kick out of that but some people, especially those who are struggling financially, spend more money than they should, money they really need on the lottery because the commercials and videos of winners make it seem so possible.

    If we weren’t in such a post-class warfare environment, where the wealthy get wealthier and the 99% lose more and more, I wouldn’t be as bothered but it is the type of thing that can support the current inequality. If people falsely believe that they too can be one of those lottery winners and join the top 1% then they are less focused on how necessary it is to change the current system.

    Not trying to be a wet blanket, I’m happy for the folks who won and hope it makes life better for all of them, just saying that if you think it’s going to happen to you and that distracts you from taking action to change our system, you’ll end up losing for sure.

    • kesmarn says:

      AdLib, like you I’m happy for the people who won, especially since it seems that some of them really got hit hard in Storm Sandy. But the lottery really does seem like a form of cruel false hope for the poor as well.

      The cousin of a friend of mine started betting about $50/week on lottery tickets when he was in his later 20s. He’s now in his late fifties. For 30 years he’s spent $200 a month with almost nothing but a few small wins to show for it. What does that amount to? $72,000? He’s never been able to buy a house. He has no retirement savings (because he was “investing” in the lottery) and his car is old and in rough shape.

      Then this area did him a real favor. They opened up the Hollywood Casino. Sigh…

      • AdLib says:

        Wow Kes, that really illustrates exactly how insidious the lottery is. He could have bought a house and had plenty of cash left over for a car and a little nest egg. Instead, $72,000 on lottery tickets? I feel sorry for him, it’s that kind of innocent facade states present as the face of the lottery and the “Make your dreams come true!”

        And the casino popping up near him? That’s not good.

        It’s getting to be like Hunger Games only it’s Poverty Games, the rare few who win the lotteries become the distractions the government uses to keep people’s minds off of how the system is stacked against them and instead focused on “One day, that’s going to be me! I’ll be a millionaire too when I win!”

    • Nirek says:

      Ad, I agree so much. I look at the lottery as a voluntary tax that I choose NOT to pay. I worked hard for the few dollars I have and refuse to gamble when the odds are so much against me.

      Here in Vermont they claim that the profits from the lottery go to education. That is good. The problem is that those who can least afford to buy the tickets are the very people buying them.

      There is a lot of psychology behind the lottery. Lots of people will buy one or two tickets a week. then you have some who play often and spend more than they can afford. The working poor come to mind. I always wish them luck and tell them I don’t play because the odds are astronomical. Leave it there.

      • glenn says:

        Nirek--I lived in FL when the lottery there began. One of the ways it was “pushed” was that all of the profits would go to education. While this is true--there are the “Bright Future” scholarships, and billboards all over the place touting how much money has gone into education--there is something the lottery proponents neglected to tell the citizens of FL.

        Because what did the legislature do as soon as the lottery was approved? They took the corresponding amount of money from the lottery out of the education budget. IOW, if the lottery generated $10 million, then the legislature slashed the education budget by that amount, or if not the whole amount, then at least half to three-quarters of that amount. The money did go to education--they just didn’t tell the citizens of FL that it was instead of DOE funding, not in addition to DOE funding.

        And, I just read an article that the FL lottery is making record “profits” this year, yet once again, the education budgets in FL are being slashed, just as they were when I taught there.

        I’m with you. I hardly ever buy lottery tickets. I do buy them once in a while, when the “pot” gets high, but I truly don’t understand how it works, so I’d rather just save my money, or spend it on other things.

        • Nirek says:

          Glenn, like you I buy one ticket when the jackpot is really big. I limit it to one ticket. My chances of winning are so small that I figure why waste money. On the bright side I have spent maybe ten dollars on lottery tickets and I’m 67 years old. Not a big investment, huh?

      • AdLib says:

        Nirek, it is a voluntary tax but tempting poorer people so aggressively is actually a form of coercion in my book. The poor and descending middle class are facing bleak prospects for their financial futures and the state comes to them and says in essence, there’s really only one way out, win the lottery.

        The CA lottery also gives a share to schools but that is such a cynical ploy to make gambling look like it’s good for society, which it is not. What happens is that though lottery funds must go to education, legislatures cut a similar amount or more from the regular budget so it’s a break even at best or in most cases, a net loss.

        Gambling isn’t an escape to count on and no matter how pretty and friendly they make it look, if “the house” wasn’t profiting off of the losses of 99.9% of the people, ey wouldn’t be doing it.

        • glenn says:

          AdLib--Oops, I just posted a reply to Nirek stating the same thing about education funding and the lottery in FL. Do you know, does it work that way in all states with lotteries?

  10. Assumed Name says:

    I’m not one for writing lots, so I was waiting for someone else to mention it, but I can wait no longer: NYC’s stop & frisk was found to be racially discriminatory: HURRAH!! 😀

    • AdLib says:

      Hey Assumed, that was huge news and a powerful slap to Bloomberg, Ray Kelly and the institutionalized racism they represent.

      The response from Bloomberg and Kelly was offensive, the naked fear mongering and affirmation of racial profiling was nauseating.

      Thank goodness a new mayor is coming in but I sure hope it’s not Bloomberg disciple Christine Quinn who thinks Stop and Frisk is a good thing. Thompson has also said he’d keep it but moderate it, only de Blasio has said he would abolish it, he’s the only true Progressive in the race but he is typically just behind Thompson in the polls. In any case, I’m rooting for whoever is up against Quinn in the runoff.

      • Assumed Name says:

        Ad Lib, I don’t consider myself naive, but I found Bloomberg’s response simply stunning. I can’t decide whether he’s delusional or a garden variety political liar: the decreases in crime he blithely attributes to stop and frisk occurred before the practice was instituted and, indeed, before he ever took office.

        The judge in the case, alas, did not abolish stop and frisk as the practice per se is considered constitutional. (!) She only substantively touched upon disparate racial impact. Even so, it was an important victory for New York’s black and Latino man. (One of the complainants was interviewed by Lawrence last evening--you could just see the pain in his face as he recounted his unprovoked run-ins with “New York’s finest.” It affected almost every aspect of his public life--how he dressed, with whom he associated, when and where he traveled. Again, Bloomberg’s response is simply stunning.)

        • AdLib says:

          Assumed, Bloomberg embodies the Wall Street mentality of insisting on control and saying and doing whatever it takes to have it. He knows he’s lying in trying to conflate the drop in crime (which is national BTW) with SAF but he is a shameless liar because to I’m, the ends justify the means.

          I saw that interview and it was powerful. Bloomberg could watch it and ignore it but there are real victims of this system of legalized assault and seeing the trauma first hand should get that across to any reasonable human being.

  11. AdLib says:

    This one’s for Killgore but no end zone dance or I’ll call a penalty. Otherwise, keep in mind that studies like this use averages so to characterize all atheists as smarter or all religious people as not as smart would be dishonest and just plain false:

    Religious people are less intelligent than atheists, according to a new review of 63 scientific studies stretching back over decades

    Intelligent people are more likely to be married, and more likely to be successful in life -- and this may mean they “need” religion less.

    A team led by Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester found “a reliable negative relation between intelligence and religiosity” in 53 out of 63 studies. Even in extreme old age, intelligent people are less likely to believe, the researchers found -- and the reasons why people with high IQs shun religion may not be as simple as previously thought.

    Intelligent people may simply be able to provide themselves with the psychological benefits offered by religion -- such as “self-regulation and self-enhancement,” because they are more likely to be successful, and have stable lives.

    http://news.yahoo.com/religious-people-are-less-intelligent-than-atheists--study-finds--113350723.html#upCr476

    On HP, there are some pretty moronic and insecure atheists who attack people who belong to a religion as automatically inferior and less intelligent. What could be less intelligent than making such a broad generalization about hundreds of millions of people?

    And on the flip side, is there anyone less intelligent than the hyper-religious extremists on the Far Right who vote against their own interests every election and can’t even spell simple words correctly on their Obamacare protest signs?

    There’s a lot of stupid to go around and it can be found on both sides but there are compassionate and intelligent people on both sides too. What this study seems to be addressing is how those with less intelligence have blowback in their lives because of that and the resulting psychological needs contribute to why they would be more prone to be religious.

    But to conclude that because one is religious, they are less intelligent is to use this kind of reciprocal logic:

    All poodles are dogs so all dogs are poodles.

    It sure would be less intelligent to think that way.

    • Ad I saw this earlier on Yahoo. I think the subject of the study is far too broad to have any real significance. There have been many, many highly intelligent “religious,” people. Thomas Aquinas and Soren Kierkegaard to mention just two.
      I think dependence on religion is maybe another matter. The study doesn’t really distinguish between types or forms of religiosity. Is the mere belief in god a form of religion? Is daily worship more religious than say, once a week? I think there are different levels of religiosity.
      As far as the childish, smug atheists on HP and all those like them, they are no different than the childish, smug evangelicals. Nobody should try to dictate what someone else believes, especially when it comes to something as comprehensive as religion, or the questions that arise, like why are we here, how did we get here, is there a Heaven, is there a Hell….etc. basically existential questions. There are certainly questions of morality.
      I think the various religions are pathways to the same end, so to speak. Many people try various religions until they find something that works for them, something they can use as a basic guide to living. I do think that religion can also be a very dangerous thing, in the hands of those who would use it to manipulate others. It is definitely a double edged sword, so to speak. I think it would be more difficult to manipulate non believers. What would you threaten them with? Certainly not eternal damnation. It would be much more difficult to instill guilt in non-believers.
      Personally, I prefer a more philosophical approach to the many questions that our existence poses. There is morality in philosophy, especially with the likes of Immanuel Kant.
      I was raised Christian. I used to believe in god. When my life turned for the worse, when mere existence was almost unbearable, religion didn’t work for me. That’s what brought me to the Tao. The Tao made sense to me where Christianity didn’t. The Tao is very moral and has several parallels to Christ’s teachings. I like the Tao because it doesn’t command. It doesn’t dictate. There are no dos and don’ts. There are no promises of Heaven or threats of Hell. The Tao Te Ching merely suggests. It is a wonderful guide to living, it works for me. Because there is no supreme “being,” in Taoism, it technically means Taoists are atheists. Atheism means nothing more than “without theism.” So many people, believers and non believers don’t understand this.

  12. kesmarn says:

    What would happen if you threw an anti-immigrant rally and nobody showed up?

    Rep. Steve King was in VA to rally the hate-troops and it seems that’s what happened.

    We were talking Friday evening about how people seem to be getting tired of the endless hate-mongering on the right. Kinda looks that way!

    [img][/img]

  13. AdLib says:

    The only thing that stops a student learning gun safety is an instructor of gun safety shooting him accidentally.

    Instructor shoots student in Ohio gun safety class

    Police say an instructor at a central Ohio gun safety class has accidentally shot a student.

    73-year-old Terry J. Dunlap Sr. was demonstrating a handgun at a training facility on Saturday when he fired a bullet that ricocheted off a desk and into the right arm of 26-year-old Michael Piemonte.

    The student says the .38-caliber bullet hit him between his elbow and armpit. He says many of the students in the class were nurses who helped stabilize him before he was transported to a Columbus hospital.

    Piemonte tells the newspaper it appears Dunlap didn’t know the gun was loaded. Dunlap hasn’t responded to requests for comment.

    http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/public/2013/08/12/concealed-carry-accidental-shooting.htm

    • kesmarn says:

      Mr. Piemonte would seem to have quite a lawsuit there, no?

      And what are all those nurses doing learning how to pack heat, I wanna know?

      • AdLib says:

        Shouldn’t Mr. Piemonte have stood his ground and shot that 73 year old man? Isn’t that 21st Century American thinking? Why sue when you can shoot?

        As for all the nurses, you know all those gun battles you are always not hearing about in hospitals? That’s why they need gun safety training.

        • kesmarn says:

          With that gun safety instructor, they definitely have job security as nurses. He’ll provide an almost unlimited supply of patients for ’em.

    • Nirek says:

      Gun safety? no gun is safe unless it is empty, and locked up. Or melted down

    • I’m sorry to hear about Mr. Piemonte’s injury, but Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

      The very FIRST rule of gun safety--Make sure to check if the gun is loaded!

      • AdLib says:

        KT, haven’t you learned your NRA talking points yet? Guns don’t shoot people, gun safety instructors do. If he didn’t have a gun, he could have accidentally shot him with a knife anyway.


Leave your Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.


Back to top
PlanetPOV Tweets
Ongoing Stories
Features