It is currently Thu Nov 28, 2024 7:41 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 359 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:50 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Yeah, you said you're not saying the kid shouldn't be punished, but then argue that his armed carjacking is no more inherently dangerous than any other, and that people who don't like COVID lockdowns can't likewise want him punished.


Speaking of dishonesty.

Yes, any middle school child should be punished for committing a crime. Especially a violent crime. I had an issue with the belief by Peeps and others that we need to punish them harsher than we currently do. In order for harsher penalties to even remotely make sense, you would have to show me that we have an epidemic of middle school kids committing violent crimes. There is absolutely no evidence of that anywhere in America.

It is absolutely a fact based on available data that someone is far more likely to contract Covid-19 than be carjacked. It's not even close either. Someone is also far more likely to die from Covid-19 after contracting it than they are getting shot after getting carjacked. Once again, it's not even close.

Somehow, you and MANY others are not only freaking out about the carjackings, but demanding that we impose harsher penalties on middle school kids who are almost never involved in these violent crimes. While at the same time being dismissive of COVID-19 and complaining about the protocols that businesses and governments are putting in place.

I don't want to be carjacked and shot or die from Covid-19. The data says that I have a better chance of dying from COVID-19. If I was going to freak out about anything it would be Covid-19 over middle school criminals.
And yet you're arguing against "increased" punishment for a child who has by all available accounts never been punished for their armed carjacking. You say you are for punishing people for crimes, even children, but have argued to the high heavens (even bringing up COVID!) that a child who has yet to be punished for repeated offenses should be severely punished for their most recent violent offense.

Also:

https://everytownresearch.org/report/notanaccident/

Quote:
Analysis of the over 2,000 incidents in the #NotAnAccident Index in which a child unintentionally shot themself or others in the period 2015 through 2020 reveals the following:

Shootings by children are most often also shootings of children. Ninety-one percent of those injured or killed in unintentional shootings by children were also under 18.4
Seven in ten of the unintentional child shootings occurred in homes, whether in the home of the shooter, the victim, a relative’s house, or another home. Unintentional shootings occurred most frequently when children were likely to be home: over the weekend, in the summer, and during school holidays.
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger.

...

Finally, unintentional shooting deaths and injuries are as likely to be self-inflicted as inflicted by someone else.11 But since stages of brain development vary widely from infants to adolescents and teenagers, we also examined the proportion of incidents in which a child shot themself or someone else broken into two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that among the younger group, roughly two-thirds of the incidents involved the child shooting themself with one-third having shot someone else. For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


Adolescents handling guns often shoot someone else, suffice it to say.


You continue to provide data that doesn't help your cause. Even with you attempting to shift the debate to a place that you believe benefits you.

From your recent link:
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger. 

You've provided 2 links. One link shows that people 60+ and 20-29 have far more self inflicted fatal gun accidents than people 10-19 and even younger than that. The next link you provided shows that most accidental shooting by kids occur before first grade or in high school. Looks like middle school kids are the most responsible when it comes to handling guns.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:54 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 25, 2018 8:58 am
Posts: 6307
pizza_Place: Frozen
Frank Coztansa wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?
Another bigfanesque post. At least now it seems he's learned to proofread or use the spellcheck.

You've posted 25+ times today at 2 pm. You've got a serious problem.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 22576
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Yeah, you said you're not saying the kid shouldn't be punished, but then argue that his armed carjacking is no more inherently dangerous than any other, and that people who don't like COVID lockdowns can't likewise want him punished.


Speaking of dishonesty.

Yes, any middle school child should be punished for committing a crime. Especially a violent crime. I had an issue with the belief by Peeps and others that we need to punish them harsher than we currently do. In order for harsher penalties to even remotely make sense, you would have to show me that we have an epidemic of middle school kids committing violent crimes. There is absolutely no evidence of that anywhere in America.

It is absolutely a fact based on available data that someone is far more likely to contract Covid-19 than be carjacked. It's not even close either. Someone is also far more likely to die from Covid-19 after contracting it than they are getting shot after getting carjacked. Once again, it's not even close.

Somehow, you and MANY others are not only freaking out about the carjackings, but demanding that we impose harsher penalties on middle school kids who are almost never involved in these violent crimes. While at the same time being dismissive of COVID-19 and complaining about the protocols that businesses and governments are putting in place.

I don't want to be carjacked and shot or die from Covid-19. The data says that I have a better chance of dying from COVID-19. If I was going to freak out about anything it would be Covid-19 over middle school criminals.
And yet you're arguing against "increased" punishment for a child who has by all available accounts never been punished for their armed carjacking. You say you are for punishing people for crimes, even children, but have argued to the high heavens (even bringing up COVID!) that a child who has yet to be punished for repeated offenses should be severely punished for their most recent violent offense.

Also:

https://everytownresearch.org/report/notanaccident/

Quote:
Analysis of the over 2,000 incidents in the #NotAnAccident Index in which a child unintentionally shot themself or others in the period 2015 through 2020 reveals the following:

Shootings by children are most often also shootings of children. Ninety-one percent of those injured or killed in unintentional shootings by children were also under 18.4
Seven in ten of the unintentional child shootings occurred in homes, whether in the home of the shooter, the victim, a relative’s house, or another home. Unintentional shootings occurred most frequently when children were likely to be home: over the weekend, in the summer, and during school holidays.
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger.

...

Finally, unintentional shooting deaths and injuries are as likely to be self-inflicted as inflicted by someone else.11 But since stages of brain development vary widely from infants to adolescents and teenagers, we also examined the proportion of incidents in which a child shot themself or someone else broken into two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that among the younger group, roughly two-thirds of the incidents involved the child shooting themself with one-third having shot someone else. For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


Adolescents handling guns often shoot someone else, suffice it to say.


You continue to provide data that doesn't help your cause. Even with you attempting to shift the debate to a place that you believe benefits you.

From your recent link:
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger. 

You've provided 2 links. One link shows that people 60+ and 20-29 have far more self inflicted fatal gun accidents than people 10-19 and even younger than that. The next link you provided shows that most accidental shooting by kids occur before first grade or in high school. Looks like middle school kids are the most responsible when it comes to handling guns.
I knew you'd continue to try to be dishonest about it.
Quote:
two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that ...For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


10 to 17, almost two-thirds of accidental shootings of people aged 10 to 17, the adolescent was the (accidental) shooter rather than the victim. This answers exactly your question of whether the previous stats showed whether "other-inflected" incidents were the kids shooting someone else or getting shot. People aged 10 to 17 shoot way more people accidentally than they do get shot accidentally by firearms.

As for your issues with the age groups, I can't make the data any more granular, as I don't have access to it. Do you know what the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is, by the way?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 3:55 pm
Posts: 33067
Location: Wrigley
pizza_Place: Warren Buffet of Cock
vitoscotti wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?
Another bigfanesque post. At least now it seems he's learned to proofread or use the spellcheck.

You've posted 25+ times today at 2 pm. You've got a serious problem.


Vito creating the thread of the day and then going after big frank….

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
vitoscotti wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?
Another bigfanesque post. At least now it seems he's learned to proofread or use the spellcheck.

You've posted 25+ times today at 2 pm. You've got a serious problem.



Probably the least of his problems.

His fascination with calling you Scot or bigfan is another in a long line of lies he posts here regularly.

"My phone was at 30% so I couldn't take a picture" is another regular fable.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 2:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
I think that has more to do with the resources available to those schools and the quality of education than it does "wayward" kids. Those kids exist even at the best public schools. Instead of frequent fights, you get more drug usage and pill passing.

I also think zero tolerance is too punitive in most cases. As I said, I don't think Restorative Justice or any singular measure is enough to reach all kids. You're right, I think far too many schools are too lenient. There has to be some balance. I suspect that the leniency is more about thumbing their noses at the RJ practice. Even in the "better" schools, I don't think it's unusual given a chance because most people don't believe in it or the wayward kids.

The government says that kids have to be in school until a certain age. I could be wrong, but if we are going to have wayward kids in school, we should probably find ways to educate them. If not RJ then other approaches.


"Quality of Education" has very little to do with it. Whitney Young and Northside Prep are "great" schools mostly because they select kids from the 99 percentile of their respective elementary school. MANY (particularly in the case of Whitney Young) do not come from the best neighborhoods in the city either. If they were to decide to attend their neighborhood school the "quality of education" gets better overnight. Has very little to do with the level of instruction either. The quality of instruction isn't drastically different. Its the quality of student that is drastically different. Teachers in schools like Manley have to take kids that are 2-3 grades in reading by the time they reach high school. In fact the only reason the student is in high school in the first place is because they were aged out of elementary school.

Restorative can work in individual cases. As school wide and district level policy it is primarily a joke. There has to be expectations around student behavior. Restorative Justice in essence says that there should not. And when you say that people aren't really practicing it you're wrong. From Central Office to the Network level school after school is being implored to implement it. In most cases with disastrous results. And again the premise behind it isn't to improve discipline as much as it is to fudge the numbers and make it appear that "our shit don't stink". And then when the scab comes off (usually in the form of what occurred at Lincoln Park) then they want heads to roll from the Administrative level on down.

Restorative is always all good until a situation arises in which they want you to be more punitive.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:01 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33819
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?


Lee Elia Vitoscotti over here.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:04 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Spaulding wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?


Lee Elia Vitoscotti over here.


Thanks les.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:06 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33819
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
I haven't crapped my pants in weeks!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Frank in the gif and Frank in real life both showed up. LTG was nowhere to be found at the Oasis, though your dumbass is yet to call him out for that.


"If there is one thing that I know, Its that you were nowhere near 35th and Lowe" :lol: :lol:

And the worst part is that you proceeded to lie to your message board guys about it knowing that you were MIA. You have no integrity but then again neither do the guys that believed your lying bullshit. That is why they were so easily duped.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:09 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Yeah, you said you're not saying the kid shouldn't be punished, but then argue that his armed carjacking is no more inherently dangerous than any other, and that people who don't like COVID lockdowns can't likewise want him punished.


Speaking of dishonesty.

Yes, any middle school child should be punished for committing a crime. Especially a violent crime. I had an issue with the belief by Peeps and others that we need to punish them harsher than we currently do. In order for harsher penalties to even remotely make sense, you would have to show me that we have an epidemic of middle school kids committing violent crimes. There is absolutely no evidence of that anywhere in America.

It is absolutely a fact based on available data that someone is far more likely to contract Covid-19 than be carjacked. It's not even close either. Someone is also far more likely to die from Covid-19 after contracting it than they are getting shot after getting carjacked. Once again, it's not even close.

Somehow, you and MANY others are not only freaking out about the carjackings, but demanding that we impose harsher penalties on middle school kids who are almost never involved in these violent crimes. While at the same time being dismissive of COVID-19 and complaining about the protocols that businesses and governments are putting in place.

I don't want to be carjacked and shot or die from Covid-19. The data says that I have a better chance of dying from COVID-19. If I was going to freak out about anything it would be Covid-19 over middle school criminals.
And yet you're arguing against "increased" punishment for a child who has by all available accounts never been punished for their armed carjacking. You say you are for punishing people for crimes, even children, but have argued to the high heavens (even bringing up COVID!) that a child who has yet to be punished for repeated offenses should be severely punished for their most recent violent offense.

Also:

https://everytownresearch.org/report/notanaccident/

Quote:
Analysis of the over 2,000 incidents in the #NotAnAccident Index in which a child unintentionally shot themself or others in the period 2015 through 2020 reveals the following:

Shootings by children are most often also shootings of children. Ninety-one percent of those injured or killed in unintentional shootings by children were also under 18.4
Seven in ten of the unintentional child shootings occurred in homes, whether in the home of the shooter, the victim, a relative’s house, or another home. Unintentional shootings occurred most frequently when children were likely to be home: over the weekend, in the summer, and during school holidays.
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger.

...

Finally, unintentional shooting deaths and injuries are as likely to be self-inflicted as inflicted by someone else.11 But since stages of brain development vary widely from infants to adolescents and teenagers, we also examined the proportion of incidents in which a child shot themself or someone else broken into two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that among the younger group, roughly two-thirds of the incidents involved the child shooting themself with one-third having shot someone else. For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


Adolescents handling guns often shoot someone else, suffice it to say.


You continue to provide data that doesn't help your cause. Even with you attempting to shift the debate to a place that you believe benefits you.

From your recent link:
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger. 

You've provided 2 links. One link shows that people 60+ and 20-29 have far more self inflicted fatal gun accidents than people 10-19 and even younger than that. The next link you provided shows that most accidental shooting by kids occur before first grade or in high school. Looks like middle school kids are the most responsible when it comes to handling guns.
I knew you'd continue to try to be dishonest about it.
Quote:
two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that ...For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


10 to 17, almost two-thirds of accidental shootings of people aged 10 to 17, the adolescent was the (accidental) shooter rather than the victim. This answers exactly your question of whether the previous stats showed whether "other-inflected" incidents were the kids shooting someone else or getting shot. People aged 10 to 17 shoot way more people accidentally than they do get shot accidentally by firearms.

As for your issues with the age groups, I can't make the data any more granular, as I don't have access to it. Do you know what the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is, by the way?



Your link did that for me and I highlighted it. Kids before first grade and teenagers 14-17 are more likely to be accidental shooters and shooting victims. When you add that with your accidental shooting data that shows more people 20-29 and 60+ kill themselves, it completely debunks your theory that a middle school criminal is more likely to kill someone by accident.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
When you have a CPS teacher asking about 19 year old middle schoolers, the joke kind of takes care of itself.


Hey Look! habitual liar Frank just doing what he does best around these parts. Lie.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Last edited by The Missing Link on Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:11 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Seacrest wrote:
His fascination with calling you Scot or bigfan is another in a long line of lies he posts here regularly.
If only there was a moderator here worth his salt who could prove me wrong................

The biggest lie ever told on this board is that YOU ignore me. You've mentioned my name or replied directly to me no fewer than five times in this thread. You make Caller Bob look like an Ivy leaguer.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Last edited by Frank Coztansa on Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2021 10:21 pm
Posts: 663
pizza_Place: Angie's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?
Another bigfanesque post. At least now it seems he's learned to proofread or use the spellcheck.

I have a student who writes like Bigfan. Unpredictable misspellings, out-of-place rhetorical questions that give off the faint aroma of threats, the occasional all-caps phrase, and extra spaces that I assume are supposed to be pregnant with meaning.

It's not a knock on either; they just remind me of one another.

_________________
W_Z wrote:
we continue to live in a real-time "monsters are due on maple street."


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33819
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
This is really fucking depressing. 11 years old.

There is a job I want to apply for but it's about a mile from the UC. I don't think I'm going to bother with it. This all sucks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 4:46 pm
Posts: 22576
pizza_Place: Giordano's
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Nas wrote:
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
Yeah, you said you're not saying the kid shouldn't be punished, but then argue that his armed carjacking is no more inherently dangerous than any other, and that people who don't like COVID lockdowns can't likewise want him punished.


Speaking of dishonesty.

Yes, any middle school child should be punished for committing a crime. Especially a violent crime. I had an issue with the belief by Peeps and others that we need to punish them harsher than we currently do. In order for harsher penalties to even remotely make sense, you would have to show me that we have an epidemic of middle school kids committing violent crimes. There is absolutely no evidence of that anywhere in America.

It is absolutely a fact based on available data that someone is far more likely to contract Covid-19 than be carjacked. It's not even close either. Someone is also far more likely to die from Covid-19 after contracting it than they are getting shot after getting carjacked. Once again, it's not even close.

Somehow, you and MANY others are not only freaking out about the carjackings, but demanding that we impose harsher penalties on middle school kids who are almost never involved in these violent crimes. While at the same time being dismissive of COVID-19 and complaining about the protocols that businesses and governments are putting in place.

I don't want to be carjacked and shot or die from Covid-19. The data says that I have a better chance of dying from COVID-19. If I was going to freak out about anything it would be Covid-19 over middle school criminals.
And yet you're arguing against "increased" punishment for a child who has by all available accounts never been punished for their armed carjacking. You say you are for punishing people for crimes, even children, but have argued to the high heavens (even bringing up COVID!) that a child who has yet to be punished for repeated offenses should be severely punished for their most recent violent offense.

Also:

https://everytownresearch.org/report/notanaccident/

Quote:
Analysis of the over 2,000 incidents in the #NotAnAccident Index in which a child unintentionally shot themself or others in the period 2015 through 2020 reveals the following:

Shootings by children are most often also shootings of children. Ninety-one percent of those injured or killed in unintentional shootings by children were also under 18.4
Seven in ten of the unintentional child shootings occurred in homes, whether in the home of the shooter, the victim, a relative’s house, or another home. Unintentional shootings occurred most frequently when children were likely to be home: over the weekend, in the summer, and during school holidays.
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger.

...

Finally, unintentional shooting deaths and injuries are as likely to be self-inflicted as inflicted by someone else.11 But since stages of brain development vary widely from infants to adolescents and teenagers, we also examined the proportion of incidents in which a child shot themself or someone else broken into two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that among the younger group, roughly two-thirds of the incidents involved the child shooting themself with one-third having shot someone else. For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


Adolescents handling guns often shoot someone else, suffice it to say.


You continue to provide data that doesn't help your cause. Even with you attempting to shift the debate to a place that you believe benefits you.

From your recent link:
The two age groups most likely to be both shooters and victims were teenagers 14 to 17 first, and then preschoolers five and younger. 

You've provided 2 links. One link shows that people 60+ and 20-29 have far more self inflicted fatal gun accidents than people 10-19 and even younger than that. The next link you provided shows that most accidental shooting by kids occur before first grade or in high school. Looks like middle school kids are the most responsible when it comes to handling guns.
I knew you'd continue to try to be dishonest about it.
Quote:
two age groupings: children ages 0 to 9 and 10 to 17. We found that ...For the adolescent and teenage group, the proportion was inverted. Rougly 40 percent were self-inflicted incidents and 58 percent involved the young person shooting someone else.


10 to 17, almost two-thirds of accidental shootings of people aged 10 to 17, the adolescent was the (accidental) shooter rather than the victim. This answers exactly your question of whether the previous stats showed whether "other-inflected" incidents were the kids shooting someone else or getting shot. People aged 10 to 17 shoot way more people accidentally than they do get shot accidentally by firearms.

As for your issues with the age groups, I can't make the data any more granular, as I don't have access to it. Do you know what the Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy is, by the way?



Your link did that for me and I highlighted it. Kids before first grade and teenagers 14-17 are more likely to be accidental shooters and shooting victims. When you add that with your accidental shooting data that shows more people 20-29 and 60+ kill themselves, it completely debunks your theory that a middle school criminal is more likely to kill someone by accident.
That's...not at all true, but alright. The data shows that the 10-17 group is more likely than not to accidentally kill someone else than themselves. Why is this so hard for you to accept?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:14 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Wayne Kerr wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
vitoscotti wrote:
Do any of the mega posters of this thread have jobs? Where do you find time to post long arguments 15x in a weekday morning?
Another bigfanesque post. At least now it seems he's learned to proofread or use the spellcheck.

I have a student who writes like Bigfan. Unpredictable misspellings, out-of-place rhetorical questions that give off the faint aroma of threats, the occasional all-caps phrase, and extra spaces that I assume are supposed to be pregnant with meaning.

It's not a knock on either; they just remind me of one another.



Which is natural.

Calling someone bigfan without a scintilla of evidence is a malicious lie, but par for his "course" through life.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:15 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Spaulding wrote:
This is really fucking depressing. 11 years old.

There is a job I want to apply for but it's about a mile from the UC. I don't think I'm going to bother with it. This all sucks.



The gluten free bread maker up on Fulton Spaulding?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33819
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
No but I can look them up and be sad about another job I won't take.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:18 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Spaulding wrote:
No but I can look them up and be sad about another job I won't take.



He makes a damn good gluten free pita bread.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:19 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Spaulding wrote:
No but I can look them up and be sad about another job I won't take.


But why wouldn't you take the job if you really believe that you can help? And from speaking with you previously I gather you believe that you can.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:20 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Seacrest wrote:
Calling someone bigfan without a scintilla of evidence is a malicious lie, but par for his "course" through life.
First, multhunting is tried and true tradition on this board. I don't recall you ever saying anything when people referred to you as Barry Rozner for years on here. You definitely didn't say it was "malicious."

You just told jbills in the Politics section to, "Show us something different then." Same applies here. Show us vitoscotti isn't bigfan. Because their though processes and sentence structure at times are very similar. Circumstantial? Perhaps. So prove me wrong, champ.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:22 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38362
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
The Missing Link wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
When you have a CPS teacher asking about 19 year old middle schoolers, the joke kind of takes care of itself.


Hey Look! habitual liar Frank just doing what he does best around these parts. Lie.



If Ruffcorn posted that, there would be a line of people already calling him a racist.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:23 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
Calling someone bigfan without a scintilla of evidence is a malicious lie, but par for his "course" through life.
First, multhunting is tried and true tradition on this board. I don't recall you ever saying anything when people referred to you as Barry Rozner for years on here. You definitely didn't say it was "malicious."

You just told jbills in the Politics section to, "Show us something different then." Same applies here. Show us vitoscotti isn't bigfan. Because their though processes and sentence structure at times are very similar. Circumstantial? Perhaps. So prove me wrong, champ.


Wannabe Moderator at work yet again. Who gives a shit if he is BigFan or not? Oh my bad you do. What are you going to do if he is? Stalk him into submission like you did BigFan? Just Asking Questions

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:27 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
Seacrest obviously cares or he wouldn't have posted about it. You obviously care or you wouldn't have posted about it. You obviously still care about your failure to show up at the Oasis because you posted about it yet again just a few minutes ago. Seacrest obviously knows and cares about the entire saga because he posted a Seinfeld Frank Costanza gif, and despite what he says its very clear he reads MANY of my posts. Why do you care so much? Just asking questions.

And I'll answer yours before you even get to it, ltg. I absolutely could not care less what a shitstain like you and a liar like Seacrest thinks of me.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:28 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Seacrest wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Frank Coztansa wrote:
When you have a CPS teacher asking about 19 year old middle schoolers, the joke kind of takes care of itself.


Hey Look! habitual liar Frank just doing what he does best around these parts. Lie.



If Ruffcorn posted that, there would be a line of people already calling him a racist.


Frank would never be in it though. Truth be told the disingenuous asswipe originally took issue with me because I called bigots out for being bigoted. That is where all of his bullshit started. Then (what two weeks ago?) he lied and claimed that the only reason that he never called WFR out (notice how he is trying to play catch up now?) for being a bigot is because it wouldn't change his posting style. Ponder that for a second. The guy who spends every waking moment that he has here trying to change and critique the posting style of others only now decided to back off, as it would not have had much of an impact. Mind you the very same asswipe just can't get enough of "just came here for the sports" or whatever else his lying ass happens to be lying about the moment. Interesting.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:29 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
I think that has more to do with the resources available to those schools and the quality of education than it does "wayward" kids. Those kids exist even at the best public schools. Instead of frequent fights, you get more drug usage and pill passing.

I also think zero tolerance is too punitive in most cases. As I said, I don't think Restorative Justice or any singular measure is enough to reach all kids. You're right, I think far too many schools are too lenient. There has to be some balance. I suspect that the leniency is more about thumbing their noses at the RJ practice. Even in the "better" schools, I don't think it's unusual given a chance because most people don't believe in it or the wayward kids.

The government says that kids have to be in school until a certain age. I could be wrong, but if we are going to have wayward kids in school, we should probably find ways to educate them. If not RJ then other approaches.


"Quality of Education" has very little to do with it. Whitney Young and Northside Prep are "great" schools mostly because they select kids from the 99 percentile of their respective elementary school. MANY (particularly in the case of Whitney Young) do not come from the best neighborhoods in the city either. If they were to decide to attend their neighborhood school the "quality of education" gets better overnight. Has very little to do with the level of instruction either. The quality of instruction isn't drastically different. Its the quality of student that is drastically different. Teachers in schools like Manley have to take kids that are 2-3 grades in reading by the time they reach high school. In fact the only reason the student is in high school in the first place is because they were aged out of elementary school.

Restorative can work in individual cases. As school wide and district level policy it is primarily a joke. There has to be expectations around student behavior. Restorative Justice in essence says that there should not. And when you say that people aren't really practicing it you're wrong. From Central Office to the Network level school after school is being implored to implement it. In most cases with disastrous results. And again the premise behind it isn't to improve discipline as much as it is to fudge the numbers and make it appear that "our shit don't stink". And then when the scab comes off (usually in the form of what occurred at Lincoln Park) then they want heads to roll from the Administrative level on down.

Restorative is always all good until a situation arises in which they want you to be more punitive.


I don't disagree that the raiding of neighborhood schools widened the education gap for many communities. I still don't think most parents are trying to avoid "wayward" kids. We're just looking at data that shows that selective or private options (for those who can afford it) are best in nearly every case.

There is no one size fits all. The district has that wrong. The old way of doing things wasn't exactly great. There has to be some willingness to try new things. From my experience, the adults (including parents) hate changing anything. Any proposal turns into a Grievance Fest.

Balance is usually best in life and sports. Sometimes you need to give a kid a hug and sometimes you need to pop them in the back of the head. In each case, it never hurts to remember that they're a child.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:32 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Frank Coztansa wrote:
Seacrest obviously cares or he wouldn't have posted about it. You obviously care or you wouldn't have posted about it. You obviously still care about your failure to show up at the Oasis because you posted about it yet again just a few minutes ago. Seacrest obviously knows and cares about the entire saga because he posted a Seinfeld Frank Costanza gif, and despite what he says its very clear he reads MANY of my posts. Why do you care so much? Just asking questions.

And I'll answer yours before you even get to it, ltg. I absolutely could not care less what a shitstain like you and a liar like Seacrest thinks of me.


You obviously care what others here think or you would not have gone out of your way (Not Near 35th and Lowe mind you) to lie to them. And you also obviously care what someone thinks or you wouldn't continue to reference it well after its expiration date. What are you trying to prove BallPark? Or convince yourself of? Just Asking Questions.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:36 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
I cared enough to show up at the Oasis the very day you challenged me, and you no showed. You're a shitstain who brags about having "200 close friends" to go Vegas with, yet fail to provide any proof that you actually have a life outside of your career.

Why would I care what you think of me? I don't, but I will continue to call you out every time you lie on here...which is pretty much daily.

Seacrest is an absolute idiot who would drive to his chiropractor with a gunshot wound and touts his natural immunity even while is he sick with Covid for the second time.

Why would I care what he thinks of me? I don't, but I will continue to call him out every time he lies on here...which is pretty much daily.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2021 3:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
I don't disagree that the raiding of neighborhood schools widened the education gap for many communities. I still don't think most parents are trying to avoid "wayward" kids. We're just looking at data that shows that selective or private options (for those who can afford it) are best in nearly every case.

There is no one size fits all. The district has that wrong. The old way of doing things wasn't exactly great. There has to be some willingness to try new things. From my experience, the adults (including parents) hate changing anything. Any proposal turns into a Grievance Fest.

Balance is usually best in life and sports. Sometimes you need to give a kid a hug and sometimes you need to pop them in the back of the head. In each case, it never hurts to remember that they're a child.


The misnomer is that they are better because of the quality of instruction when in fact they are not. There are good teachers in Manley High School also and to be honest I have a helluva lot more respect for the job that the person at Manley does as opposed to Whitney Young. Schools with built in advantages shouldn't lauded for how great they are. I know I have referenced how "great" those schools are in the past but it was never for the quality of instruction that they provide. Its not hard to have a "great" school when you pull from the "best" kids that the city has to offer.

If you placed the very same teachers from Payton inside of Orr the results would not be drastically different. If they are different at all. As far as your other point it depends on the child to be honest. And your obligation has to be foremost to the school. I remember when I was in the classroom I had a student that I knew was heavy in the streets. Never had a conflict with him ever. Never got into his business though I knew what his business was from growing up in that environment. Then one day me and another teacher were walking down the hallway and she said to him "I'm going to save you". You watch and see is what she said to me as he walked off. I looked at her like she was a damn fool because I felt I knew where his heart happened to be. It wasn't school it was the streets. He used school as a rest haven and sanctuary until he got off into what he really wanted to do (selling drugs on the block). Couldn't have been a year or 2 later I heard about him and his guys popping 5-6 people while out in the neighborhood.

That wasn't the fault of the person that tried to "save" him. Nor was it the fault of anyone that ever taught him either. It was his fault and the people that actually had real influence over him. They steered him down a path that he had difficulty ever deviating from. I get what you are saying regarding hugs and things but it makes it tough as hell when a kid doesn't want to be reached.

And this 11 year old may or may not fall into this particular category. The way he is going it is likely that he doesn't

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 359 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 12  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group