Holy crap! The whistleblower that outed the new speed over safety policies was found dead in his car of a gunshot in S Carolina where he had travelled to testify in a case against Boeing.
This comes just a day after nearly 50 passengers were injured by a “severe shaking” in another Boeing plane.

Nobody got “smoked”, there were no injuries at all. Why the lie, @bobknight33? Why must you ALWAYS lie?

Curious why this 34 year old story is suddenly everywhere on right wing media and websites…and why they aren’t mentioning how it’s evolved over the years.
Is it an effort to poeticize a vigilante group as an example? They didn’t call police in the day long buildup to the shootout, nor immediately when it started, and they intentionally antagonized and threatened the neighbors they accused (without proof) of being gang members and shot up their house.

In 89 “lying in wait” was a death penalty offense in California…I guess not even a crime in Washington? They admitted they did exactly that.

Foulk said to 48 Hours in 1990 that he had told the Rangers to avoid hitting anyone and they followed instructions, not hitting anyone. In 2009, Foulk said to The News Tribune that one Ranger had in fact winged someone who charged the house. In 2022, he said to Fox 13 Seattle that the Rangers shot multiple people (no one ever went to any hospital with a gunshot). The story keeps growing every time he tells it.

Two men fitting descriptions given by the rangers were arrested on outstanding warrants and one later charged in connection to the shooting, and he received only one conviction, and only of second-degree assault. Neither lived across the street at the house the rangers shot to hell.
Many of the rangers lost their guns and Foulk says he was denied promotion as a result of the publicity caused by the shootout and that other Rangers were forbidden from visiting his home.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ash_Street_shootout

Downvoting this apparent attempt to glamorize what was a clear vigilante group that should have had much worse consequences than losing their guns and promotions.

Hoax gunshot, real bomb delivery?

Source?

I know these are bullshit statistics Bob, because there have been 212 already this year with over 250 deaths in 5 months. Nice try, another easily debunked lie.

Edit: There we’re another 9 killed (and 63 more injured) in 14 mass shootings just this weekend, including 6 kids under 15 in just one.

the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey puts the number of citizens who prevent crimes by using guns much lower than 2.5 million the NRA often claims -- about 67,740 times a year….and in the vast majority of those they never shoot those guns.
Edit: The CDC report you cited said maybe 108,000 times per year guns were used in defense, not 750000- 1.5 million….but noted the statistics they used were incomplete and unreliable….and also noted that accidents and suicides alone vastly outweigh any positive statistic.

the Violence Policy Center statistics showed that in 2012, there were 259 justifiable self-defense homicides in which victims turned the tables, not 2 million.
They also show the theft of about 232,000 guns each year -- about 172,000 of them during burglaries. That’s a ratio of one justifiable homicide for every 896 guns put into the hands of criminals. Is that what you call “successful policy”?

By the end of 2019, there were 417 mass shootings in the U.S., according to data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive (GVA), which tracks every mass shooting in the country. Thirty-one of those shootings were mass murders. What is your definition of “mass shooting” because it’s clearly not any time 3 or more are shot by one person.

Abortions account for 0% of deaths each year….but it was targeted with outrageously regressive misogynistic laws that make women incubators without any rights including no rights to contraception. A bit more draconian than having to get a background check to buy guns, don’t you think?

On average, more than 360 people in the USA are shot every day and survive – at least long enough to get to a hospital.
In 2017, some 39,773 died from gunshot injuries, an average of nearly 109 people each day. Per capita, this is significantly higher than in other industrialized countries. The rates of gun homicide are much higher in states with higher gun ownership. More guns equate to higher crime and murder rates, not lower. That is consistent over time.

No, bob….that’s according to the NRA, not the CDC….unless you count any crime stopped or caught by police because they all have guns, but that’s not what you claimed.

900 mass shooting fatalities in what timeframe bob?

Where do you get these insane statistics bob? Your behind?

Bob, no country slaughters more of its citizens than the US thanks to guns.

It’s almost 3 times as likely someone in your home will be shot if you have a gun.

In 2020, 54% of gun homicides are suicides. (Pew)

Again, cite your sources. I know you can’t because it would be too embarrassing for you to admit they came from THE NRA, Glen Beck, or some other nut job liar….or straight from your own ass.

Baltimore, MD, March 2022 -- Dozens of "biohackers" were killed in a fire at their "open source" insulin bio lab. As of press time, at least 32 bodies were recovered at the site, with their hands and feet tied and a single gunshot would at the back of their heads. Foul play is not suspected and authorities ask reporters to respect the privacy of the grieving families during this difficult time.

Ah, I've transported a few people with lead poisoning. Most people call it gunshots.

Sorry, you seem to have bought the right wing antifa lie. Where did you get this explanation?

Most people caught shooting or committing arson were dressed as antifa but were in fact right wingers, largely boogaloos boys, who's plan is to commit crimes and blame antifa and BLM in hopes of sparking a civil (and race) war. Nearly 100% of shootings and fully 100% of attempted bombings fit that model.

Because someone wears a black facemask is no indication they support antifa. If they're armed, it's a near guarantee they are anti antifa.

1) the kid came from out of state with armed friends intent on confronting unarmed protesters with guns, you don't do this to protect a random gas station, you do this in hopes of shooting someone.
2) he sure didn't look like he had been sprayed as he ran from the murder he just committed, hands were on his weapon or above his head, not covering his face like a sprayed person.
3) white pedophile? Explain please....how would you know...because he had a 17 year old girlfriend?
4) white guy in a crowd of black men shouting "nigger"?! Doesn't sound right, and I haven't heard it in any videos, but are you saying that excuses the militia boy shooting him and others?
5) gunshot from Antifa?!? Now I know you're duped by right wing media. Antifa is pretty hard to identify unless you're dishonest and just call any black mask wearing person antifa. Also, what evidence is there of this single gunshot from the BLM crowd?
6) he was NOT running to police lines, he was running past them. He didn't stop at them and say "btw, I just shot at least 3 people and maybe more when I just shot into the crowd.", he just walked on by, still carrying the smoking gun.
7) again, where are you getting this info?

8 ) in short, a cowardly murderer who crossed state lines heavily armed who shouldn't have been there but went looking for trouble, started a fight, murdered another man, ran away armed pointing his gun at many uninvolved bystanders, shot and killed those trying to stop an armed murderer (should have emptied that glok if it existed) so he shot one, murdered another and fled the scene, the city, and the state without ever reporting that he had shot at least three people and killed at least two.

I hope he gets sentenced to life in prison, his dad too if they went together, he went heavily armed to a protest hoping to shoot some liberals, he did, now he wants to use the fact that some citizens tried to disarm and citizens arrest him after he shot someone in the head as an excuse for both murders and the other shootings?! And you buy it?!?

I'm so extremely disappointed you would buy such obvious self serving slant where the out of state multiple murderer who travelled armed looking for conflict is the victim.
That's totally asinine. I have much higher expectations for you.

Again, references for these claims please.

I don't agree with him, but there are normal protesters and then there are Antifa people.

If you dig a bit deeper into the whole Kyle Rittenhouse thing, you find out a lot that is being flat out ignored.

1. The kid was protecting a business that had already been vandalized by Antifa.
2. He was pepper sprayed by Antifa 'protesters' for guarding the site.

3. Then a white pedophile started attacking him while saying the n word, "Cmon and shoot ME, N****!"

4. In the ensuing conflict, which included at least one gunshot from the Antifa folks, Kyle shot that guy and then tried to run to the police lines as multiple Antifa people tried to chase him down to beat him/take away his gun.
5. He tripped and a person with a skateboard, as well as a rap sheet for assaults a mile long, started beating him with the skateboard as he lay prone. This was the second person who got shot.

6. The final 'protester' was carrying a Glock 17 and later said (paraphrasing) "I wish I would have just mag dumped the Glock into him while he was laying there". This protester also had a massive rap sheet and shouldn't even have had the Glock, but in his intelligence he started trying to wrestle the AR-15 from Kyle...from the business end. He was the last person shot and lost a bicep.

So, in short, a scared kid who shouldn't have been there was attacked, shot at, and mauled by several 'peaceful' protesters. He defended himself and then tried to run to the police, but they weren't having that, so some more people got shot.

Now he will probably get sentenced to life in a highly politicized trial because he stood up and tried to guard property that 'peaceful Antifa protesters' were trying to burn to the ground.

Well, that escalated slowly. For once, I'm on the officer's side.
A well deserved tazing. She was resisting arrest and was trying to hit and kick the officer after running from him.

Where does she get this sense of entitlement? Driving near 6 months with a broken taillight, and she balks at a fix it ticket? They don't have to let you off with a warning.

If that was a young man, the treatment would undoubtedly have been much more violent. Had she been black, it likely would have ended with gunshots. There's no excuse in the law for being white, female, fat, or old. Lock her up, she fled and assaulted that cop.
She's facing one hell of a lot more than $80 in fines now.

I didn't run, I just told you you couldn't arrest me and drove away....that's what running from the law means, hun.

I understand how you've come to your conclusion, but let me clear it up:

The word 'vegan' in medicine is exchangeable with plant-based diet. If you look at the PCRM.org they recommend a whole-foods plant-based diet. They simply call it vegan, as that's what other organisations know it as, such as the British/American Dietetics Association. Clearly not recommending vegan icecream and hotdogs :-)

When it comes to prevention of cruelty to animals, the PCRM do it from a medical training/testing stand point. They're not saying don't eat animals because it's cruel, they're saying don't test drugs on animals when there are computer models and lab work that yield more accurate results (although animals costs less....). They're also against surgeons performing vivisection as part of their training. E.g. when my cousin did her training she had to put a perfectly healthy dog to sleep, chop of some of it's legs and re-attach them, as well as causing massive internal wounds to simulate gunshots.... it's messed up, but it's hard for young doctors to say anything because they've trained for a decade at that point, and they're not going to throw it away (and the next person will come along and do it anyway, since it's such a highly competitive industry). This where the PCRM come in, they lobby medical institutions to stop this kind of stuff.


If you're still thinking that they have some kind of vegan agenda / bias, the PCRM is an organisation of 12,000 doctors. If it was just one or two quacks preaching veganism, I'd be suspicious too, but that's clearly not the case here.

Everything they do is based on data. And they're also not the only medical organisation to do it. The Australian Medical Association is also urging hospitals to give patients plant-based diets because of how much faster they recover (and don't return). The President of the American College of Cardiology is 'vegan', and is know for his phrase "Meat kills, processed meat kills you quicker". The World Cancer Research Fund, recommends beans with every meal, no processed meat, and maximum of 350g of red meat a week. That's basically a plant-based diet.

There are now something like 400 studies being published every single year showing how bad animal products are for us. There's a nice graph here actually showing how much more evidence is coming out all the time: https://youtu.be/C5qRXPDNw1E?t=4190 (nevermind the tacky channel, the speakers at this conference are all legitimate medical professionals)

So yes, your doctors are right, eat your fruit and veg, but also whole grains, beans, nuts and seeds. Bean burrito is a perfect combination of these, followed by a banana and berry smoothie

You also have to consider the amount of financial loss various food and pharmacological industries would suffer if most people ate plant-based. So when you look for opinions about the PCRM people are very quick to make PCRM appear as a bunch of hippies in order to protect their earnings. America spends something like 50 billion dollars a year on statins, and 35 billion on stent surgeries, which would pretty much go away overnight if everyone ate plant-based diets. They're not going to let that money go without a fight, which is why there's a lot of opinions about PCRM around. Needless to say though, they don't have any good evidence to back their reasoning, which makes it quite easy to see which ones are likely opinions funded by certain industries.

I was expecting a gunshot at the end.

So many dumb mistakes in the video...

The cop was definitely in the wrong shooting the guy and if he had waited just a half a second longer, his brain probably would have registered that the guy was complying and simply holding his wallet; i.e. not a threat. The cop was likely in a defensible position, behind the squad car, so taking that extra time before using lethal force was likely doable. But that is a lot of assumptions from my comfortable office chair.

Still, to just leave the guy laying on the ground after shooting him and then continuing to bark commands at him like he's still a threat...ugh. I've seen so many wrongful shooting videos where this happens, so it makes you wonder if it is a policy thing to minimize potential for a greater lawsuit (e.g. what if rolling the guy over to address his gunshot wound causes further damage, etc); perhaps it is to protect the officer from viral infection. Who knows, but it certainly seems callous and cold hearted.

With that said, the driver is a moron getting out of his vehicle like that. Wtf. You live in a country where your police officers are all too frequently shooting unarmed citizens by mistake and you decide to jump out of your car with your dark wallet? For what purpose? Turn off the car, turn on your cabin light, roll down the window, and wait for the officer to approach. Only reach for your wallet/permit when you're asked for your ID. Seems like common sense to me.

Did you actually watch the video? Where were white people being blamed?

Also, if the majority of gun homicides are among blacks and suicides are among white people, what fucking difference does that make? They're all still dead and the cause of death was a gunshot.

I like how he mentioned the inability of the CDC, due to regulations, to gather a comprehensive database on gun violence. As that seems to be an oft to ignored law. Undo that law, let the CDC gather all the various data points into one set, and then let that set be used for analysis. A gun used to commit a robbery, rape or other violent crime? That needs to be reported to the CDC database, along with any details known such as gun source, legality etc. A gunshot victim gets treated at a hospital or clinic, that gets reported to the CDC database along with cause, which in most cases is accidental. Suicide by gun, homicide by gun, mass shooting, all get put into that database. That data then can be used by all sides to support their cause, perhaps it will show that many of the proposed regulations would have little effect. I suspect, however, the fact that the gun lobby fights so hard to prevent the CDC from gathering the data for others to use, means they fear it will be far less favorable to their side.

I personally would be happy enough for now though for this step to be taken. So that we aren't making choices based on incomplete data and conjuncture.

I personally support the right to own a gun for hunting and self-defense. I'm not sure how an AR-15 or something like that would be useful in either case, short of an unrealistic scenario of a zombie apocalypse... and before the right-wingnuts suggest self-defense of in case of a military invasion, or from some odd right-wing fantasy of our own military, let me remind you of how well even better weapons and training worked out for the Branch Davidians. Admittedly, a military invasion scenario of either type is more likely than a zombie or otherwise apocalypse, but exceedingly low... Now if Trump gets us into WW3, and we lose power for years, and it becomes survival of the fittest, then there may be an argument, the solution to that, of course, is don't get the world into that situation with idiots like him at the wheel.

Well anyway the majority of the victims didn't die of gunshot wounds, they died of poisoning by crazy people.