I have yet to hear a logical reason people crap on Carter...they invariably just say 'Carter, if you don't understand why he sucked, I just can't talk to you', never ' Carter, this is why he sucked'.
EDIT: If it's all about leadership, stability, and helping, you must be conflicted that Tricky Dick is republican, huh? The Bushes can't help either. It's a wonder you can stick with your party, I quit the republicans when they quit being republican, before I could vote, during Regan.
Carter provided leadership in a responsible direction, but idiots desired placation rather than leadership and didn't follow. Regan placated his base, and we nearly had a depression. Carter started us on a non-interventionist foreign policy, because he personally understood the short and long term repercussions of intervening, now we've shit in their pot so hard and long that we CAN'T just go hands off anymore, we've already created our enemy. That said, it's like a junkie going cold turkey, it hurts them, may kill them, but if they survive they have a chance of life, if they don't stop, they die soon anyway. If we could find a good foreign policy methadone, we should use it at every turn and start worrying about us, IMO. If we had not installed our leaders and otherwise interfered in the first place, everyone would be better off, but that ship has sailed (in many cases because we didn't follow Carter's suggestion to stay out, I might add).
OK, got me with Boston. Ft Hood is a lone gunman, and those stopped prove my point. I think you know I meant foreign spawned terrorist attacks, but I grant I did not say that. But then you have to admit there were other successful attacks under Bush AFTER 9/11, like the guy who flew his plane into the IRS building in Texas.
Agreed, the spread of religion is always terrible, no matter which religion, some are worse than others at times, none are good. I could support outlawing organized religion, but grant that most would not.
Obama did not create radical Islam. If anyone did, it's Regan, by arming them to the teeth against the red menace, then just walking away.
I also disagree that Obama's the 'my way or the highway' guy/side. Please recall, "You're either with us or against us" is a republican slogan. The republicans stated before Obama was inaugurated that he was already the worst president ever, and their plan for the next 4-8 years was 'just say no' to everything, even to plans they designed, but they have never come up with any alternatives, just "not Obama's way" over and over, that's real 'not leading' as opposed to the type they accuse Obama of.
4.5 years of shitty economy, but trending up, not down even then.
Where I live, jobs have been an issue since Regan/Bush 1, so I don't think you want to point that finger here.
Not true, stagnant over the last 14+ years. They certainly went up in the 90's.
Once again, Bush economics caused the recession, salaries went down during the recession/depression. Salaries are on the way up now...not fast enough, granted, but up.
Obama has NEVER been able to do whatever he thinks/wants. That is delusional. Even when the democrats had the votes to do so, they didn't, because they suck donkey dicks. Happy? ;-)
Times were better for a special few under Regan, not most. Times got better for most everyone under Clinton.
We agree on your final point, the Bushes sucked, lets build on that and not make that mistake again.

The only thing that I think is not getting enough air time, is the other officer that was shot during this. Const. Samearn Son.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ottawa-shooting-gunman-s-movements-caught-on-video-but-security-questions-remain-1.2810673

"Const. Samearn Son, a 10-year veteran of the Commons security team, was the first person to try to stop him, sources have told CBC News.

Son immediately noticed the long rifle in Zehaf-Bibeau's hand.

Although he was unarmed, Son lunged at the shooter, grabbing the gun and pulling it toward the floor, screaming "Gun! Gun! Gun!"

That alerted the plainclothes officers inside the building, who have weapons. During the ensuing struggle, Son was shot in the foot. He was taken to hospital later in the day, and released that night, but with a permanent souvenir — the bullet will stay in his foot, sources say, as it would do more damage to remove it."

Totally proud of Kevin Vickers, but it takes a lot of balls to jump on an armed suspect bare handed.

Play by play. How Kevin Vickers managed to subdue Ottawa gunman.

There's one problem with every gun disarm I've ever seen. They rely on having a gunman who is stupid enough to let you get within arms reach without shooting you.

"The crazy gunman hated Muslims, obviously the real danger are the Muslim acts of terror in retaliation."

Riiiiiiiigggghhhhttt.

Your video, CCTV footage of Brisbane gunman's mall siege, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Congratulations! Your comment has just received enough votes from the community to earn you 1 Power Point. Thank you for your quality contribution to VideoSift.

So what happens when you run into a gunman that knows the same trick?

Yeah, you do that. Bend over backwards and do whatever they want. I hear that works out super well.

I have tried this, years ago, both ways (me as gunman and defendant) at the same distance as this video. The gunman reacts too slow every single time (as others have pointed out).

You're half right though. A well trained armed assailant won't close the distance like that. In which case every situation is different. If you think they are going to kill you anyway, i.e. they're on a rampage or you think they'll murder you after you do what they say, then it's time to man up and do whatever you can to stop them and every scenario will be different. You can't outrun a bullet and so running away may not be an option, in which case would you rather be found with a bullet in the front of your body as you attempt to stop them or in the back of your body as you tried to vainly run away?

That is such bullshit. If the gunman's finger had been on the trigger, the gun would have gone off in his face. Or shot the person standing next to him.

Actually it's pretty easy to disarm someone within 3 feet of you -- the closer they are the better. (Bruce Lee popularized the idea but it's a concept that's been around for a long time.) We did it the other way though so as to break the trigger finger and keep the gun to the outside.
No need for a water pistol -- I would do this experiment.
I would get in front of a student, hands at my side. I WOULD TELL him: "I'm going to smack you in the forehead with my open hand. All you have to do is stop me. Ready?"
Within 3 feet you will always tag them EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW IT'S COMING. The human brain cannot perceive motion and react to it fast enough. Go ahead and try it for yourself...
The Hollywood cliche where one guy has a gun to the other guy's forehead makes me laugh. Dude could easily pluck that gun from him.
Now if the gunman is any further than 3 feet from you... then you ARE in trouble.

He just isn't educated enough on history to understand what he's talking about. He's very intelligent and he makes very good arguments, but he relates all those arguments to his experiences working around Law Enforcement and what hog ties them.

Now if he saw Law Enforcement wiping out and destroying city blocks or paying gunman to drag women out of houses and murder and rape children than maybe he'd have a different idea of what this NSA thing means.

The fact is that he hasn't seen jack shit, because he hasn't stood in front of an Israeli bulldozer, he hasn't looked into a mass grave in East Timor. He's just not informed.

Yeah.......something just not right about it. I know I supported a video about a gunman getting shot in Venezuela, but that guy had it coming to him, this guy did not so my conscience got the better of me.

No regrets.

Truth be told here folks, I was gonna post this video but I asked the opinion of another sifter who responded by saying that it was a bad idea & it could bring me some trouble......(looks like that person was right).

My own personal definition of "snuff" is when somebody is killed/murdered in front of a camera in a controlled environment for the "pleasure of the viewer" & neither of those situations are happening here. A guy pulls up to a cash machine to make a withdrawal, gets snuck up on from behind by a gunman, he responds likewise & criminal pays the price for his actions.

To those here who say "snuff", ..... I respond with the word "justice" & for the first time in my almost two years of membership, I invoke *return.

/climbs off soapbox.

Gunman style.