-  [WT]  [Home] [Manage]

[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]
Posting mode: Reply
Subject   (reply to 111163)
File URL
Embed   Help
Password  (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG, WEBM
  • Maximum file size allowed is 5120 KB.
  • Images greater than 300x300 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Currently 1032 unique user posts.

  • Blotter updated: 2017-02-04 Show/Hide Show All

Patches and Stickers for sale here

File 150922949489.jpg - (116.48KB , 640x426 , old-man-pondering-5472x3648_49502.jpg )
111163 No. 111163 ID: cce514
why am i always supposed to thank military ppl and cops for their service but nobody from the government ever thanks me for paying my taxes and earning a living in the private sector by producing something of actual value (food in my case, i grow it on a farm) and thus facilitating government ppls salaries and extremely overly generous benefits and retirement packages that they award to themselves out of my pocket?
Expand all images
>> No. 111164 ID: 060ec8
File 150923517792.jpg - (198.83KB , 1280x980 , Farmer in despair over the depression in 1932.jpg )
The difference is that military and police personnel place themselves in physical danger by their service where your contribution to society is more mundane and less hazardous.
>> No. 111165 ID: cce514
File 150924243695.jpg - (57.94KB , 480x539 , F7BQbV2.jpg )
>(food in my case, i grow it on a farm)
>d-d-don't cut my hundreds of thousands of dollars in subsidies guys!

>> No. 111166 ID: 89b18a
More farmers and agricultural workers are injured or killed on the job per capita than cops or servicemen. Lots of machinery. Little oversight.
>> No. 111167 ID: 060ec8
File 150928741934.png - (490.73KB , 1583x1900 , stats Bureau of Labor Statistics for the 20 most d.png )
There are plenty of other jobs that are far more hazardous in lethal injuries than policeman in the USA. Lumberjacks, fishermen and miners typically leading the table of job-related fatalities. Even the riskiest job for being intentionally murdered on the job went to taxi drivers, being more than twice as likely than cops for being murdered, last I heard. So fuck the crybaby cops.

But cops and military personnel intentionally put themselves at risk with their service. And hardly anybody cares about how many farmers get fed into their own combines during the year.

This chart shows data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for the 20 most dangerous occupations, excluding some similar categories. Lumberjacks, fishermen and pilots run the greatest risks at work. In general, people who work with heavy machinery, from hedge trimmers to combines, are in more danger.
Members of different professions run different kinds of risks, though. Transportation accidents account for 40 percent of all deaths on the job. Other major causes are falls (13 percent), being struck by an object or equipment (11 percent) and, disturbingly, homicides (9 percent).
>> No. 111168 ID: 060ec8
File 150928795998.png - (13.34KB , 575x480 , stats military casualties per 100,000 1.png )
The Defense Manpower Data Center, one of the Department of Defense's analytical groups, has recorded 48,834 military personnel deaths from 1980 to 2010, which works out to 1,575 deaths per year. However, the American military is a huge organization, which has never slipped below 1.35 million active-duty servicemembers in any given year across all branches. There were 1.7 million active servicemembers on average per year from 1980 to 2010, and when you add in the full-time equivalent service hours of reserve forces, the United States has fielded nearly 1.9 million full-time equivalent servicemembers each year for the past three decades.

Because enlistment figures fluctuate from year to year, assessing military casualties based on the rate of death per 100,000 serving each year gives us a more consistent picture of the dangers faced by our servicemembers. Over these three decades of tracking, 82 servicemembers per 100,000 have died each year to all possible causes, and the leading cause of death is probably not the one you'd most suspect.

...The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq did push the number of combat-related deaths up significantly, to a rate of 27.7 servicemembers per 100,000 per year from 2001 through 2010. This higher fatality rate pushed the overall military death rate up to 93.4 servicemembers per 100,000 per year from 2001 through 2010.

But serving in the military isn't even the most dangerous job in America, even if we focus only on the period after the opening of these two combat theaters. Would you like to know what's more dangerous than military service?
Logging: 127.8 deaths per 100,000 workers in 2012
Fishing: 117.0 deaths per 100,000 workers in 2012
>> No. 111169 ID: 060ec8
File 150928813211.png - (395.64KB , 1583x1151 , stats Bureau of Labor Statistics for murder on the.png )
Here's the statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics for murder on the job, 2013.
As I stated, taxi drivers dominate this and beat out the cops by double the likeliness of being murdered on the job.
>> No. 111170 ID: 060ec8
  Doug Stanhope: Cops Don't Risk Their Lives For You! Cops Are Egomaniacs! https://youtu.be/WVFVj2vHEIM
>> No. 111172 ID: 278cbe
>why am i always supposed to thank military ppl and cops for their service

>military and police personnel place themselves in physical danger by their service

Logic tells me it is reasonable and deserving in those times when they actually do put themselves in physical danger instead of putting everyone else in vicinity in danger for their own safety.

I'm pretty clearly not living in any of your goddamn countr- states so I'm not going to inquire you how it is perfectly legal to shoot person 20 times for not dropping a butter knife on demand. I just say it looks dodgy to me every single time.
>> No. 111173 ID: f5c3ed
>cops and military risk their lives
>still more likely to get killed in a car crash on the way to work as a burger flipper than killed in the line of duty as a cop or in the military

Respect it earned not given. I respect individuals that I know in each organization based on what good I know they've done in their lives, but not the organizations themselves.
>> No. 111176 ID: 8f0088
Wow, you're an edgy motherfucker, aren't you?
But personally, I try to be respectful to everyone or at least courteous (until they give me a reason to temporarily abandon this policy), but I have a general hierarchy of respect. I generally respect people in the military because they do dangerous things in the service of the country that I would probably never do. I generally respect cops because they have guns and the authority to blast me with them if they feel so inclined. I respect medical doctors (except dentists because fuck them) because I personally know how difficult senior-level college biology and chemistry actually is and the dedication it takes to become a medical doctor. I respect fishermen and off-shore oil rig workers for the dangerous and necessary jobs the preform.

While on the subject of withholding respect to those until they earn it, here's an example of lavishing disrespect for those who have earned scorn with their cowardly and incompetent actions:
Why The Cops Won't Help You When You're Getting Stabbed https://youtu.be/jAfUI_hETy0
>> No. 111177 ID: 278cbe
File 150944284243.png - (874.32KB , 3564x1870 , Map_of_the_Legal_systems_of_the_world_(en).png )
>Why The Cops Won't Help You When You're Getting Stabbed
Well, I guess this should be called "welcome to the Common Law country".
>> No. 111181 ID: 8f0088
File 150946318840.jpg - (153.49KB , 563x739 , Law, police how to deal with police.jpg )
Do civil law countries have affirmative duties to the police to protect their people? In the town I am in, Castle Rock, Colorado, there was an incident in 2005 that demonstrated that the coward cretin cops can just ignore flagrant violent crimes being committed against people.

On June 27, 2005, in Castle Rock v. Gonzales, the U.S. Supreme Court again ruled that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm. The decision overturned a federal appeals court ruling which permitted a lawsuit against the town of Castle Rock for the police’s failure to respond after Jessica Gonzales tried to get the police to arrest her estranged husband Simon Gonzales for kidnapping their three daughters (ages 7, 8, and 10) while they were playing outside, in violation of a court-issued protective order. After Simon called to tell Jessica where they were at (in Denver at an amusement park), for hours she pleaded for the police to arrest Simon. But, the police failed to act before Simon showed up at the police department and started shooting inside, and with the bodies of the 3 children in the trunk of his car.
In her suit against the town, Jessica argued that the protective order stating “you shall arrest” or issue a warrant for arrest of a violator and that it gave her a “property interest” within the meaning of the 14th Amendment’s Due Process guarantees, which prohibits the deprivation of property without due process. By framing their case as one of procedural Due Process and not of substance, Jessica and her lawyers had hoped to get around the 1989 DeShaney precedent. To no avail, the U.S. Supreme Court saw little difference between this case and the DeShaney case. Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, stated that Ms. Gonzales did not have a “property interest” in enforcing the restraining order and that “such a right would not, of course, resemble any traditional conception of property.” The Court went on to reaffirm the DeShaney ruling that there is no affirmative right to aid by the government or the police found in the U.S. Constitution, and thus no legal recourse could be brought thereunder. The “no duty to protect” rule remains unwavering and the law today. http://www.barneslawllp.com/police-not-required-protect/
>> No. 111183 ID: 278cbe
File 150947495233.jpg - (118.98KB , 800x617 , 1508864677665.jpg )
I'm not big into legal systems, and, my guess is that in general, all law systems work in similar way, just there are very important details about how each case is resolved and carried out. They all are functioning systems, but with slightly different purposes.

>Do civil law countries have affirmative duties to the police to protect their people?
I guess in civil law there is not such term as "affirmative duty", only "duty" that can be interpreted in certain ways from the text of the law. Simply put, if you are policeman, you have duty to protect people and property, no matter what happens - of course there are priorities as far as common sense goes. The Cops Will Help, but you should pray they do it in the right way.

It is, of course, does not prevent law from being obscured, corrupted or ignored at times, but at least it provides straightforward, clear and comprehensible rule that regulates the situation, to which the victim of injustice can refer to without lengthy explanations. AFAIK, civil law system ("continental") tries to judge by the substance of the case, and acknowledges that cases that look similar on the outside can have entirely different meaning on the inside.
>> No. 111221 ID: 176c5c
Thanks for paying your taxes, OP. Millions on welfare are counting on you!
>> No. 111236 ID: d7e6b8
File 150998989887.jpg - (320.62KB , 1200x820 , usarmy01.jpg )
>why am i always supposed to thank military ppl and cops for their service

Simply put don't. You are not required to and vets typically do not want you to.

It is a catch 22.

You thank me, and the only show reel that plays in my head is all of the FUBAR things that went down. Things that only make me lament that I am no longer there doing the deal.

If you thank me, I will be cordial and say something like "no problem" and think that you are a tool for not suiting up yourself.

>thanks me for paying my taxes and earning a living in the private sector by producing something of actual value (food in my case, i grow it on a farm)


>American farm subsidies are egregiously expensive, harvesting $20 billion a year from taxpayers’ pockets.

Get your mind right.
>> No. 111238 ID: df12a0
>> No. 111271 ID: 78415a
generating blowback terrorism keeps the military industrial complex in business and the federal government deep in debt which in turn keeps the american citizens overtaxed and that impoverishment gives people less incentive to work on their own behalf.
thank you to all the soldiers for volunteering to be tools
its all fine for them, they get their pension, lifetime free healthcare and hiring preference for other taxpayer funded government jobs which pay more for less risk once they've done their turn in the military. what a bunch of selfless saints, i really feel strongly that i owe them something more than they're already getting.
if anyone protests the system less than politely these same soldiers are all ready to turn their guns on them too.
>> No. 111275 ID: 1668cd
File 151092912929.png - (128.07KB , 500x522 , look-at-me-youre-welcome-for-my-service-19297816.png )
[Return] [Entire Thread] [Last 50 posts]

Delete post []
Report post