Leaderboard

Living in a Rural community, I stop at accidents that do not already have emergency services attending. My #1 reason is that when I entered EMS I made a concious decision to "do what is right for my fellow man" ALL the time, as long as I did not put myself in harms way. I could really giva a shit if others think I am a hero, that is not why I do good things. Even if I was a plumber.... I would still stop. Being a Medic just makes me more aware of scene safety, and communicable disease. The last accident I stopped at, I sat with the pt for 35min alone, waiting for the ambulance/fire to extricate. To me, the WRONG thing to do, is call 911, and let her mentally suffer alone, injured and scared. But hey.... that is your choice. I think the problem comes, when people actually try extricating, and treating the injured. Feel free to stop the bleeding, but don't try splinting with a fence post! I agree Ruff, many Newbies stop to try get the "hero" badge, but I don't know that the majority stop for that reason.

So the military thinks its OK if I have non consensual sex with my wife?.... Please let me be mistaken

I think that perhaps you misunderstood, (and I'm going to speak for both of us, though of course that may be in error) when you take our comments to believe that there is no such thing as a difference in situations, that all is neutral if we eliminate 'good' and 'bad.' I proposed that the words themselves have gained a power that is unproductive. About a gazillion years ago B. F. Skinner proposed that we would never come to a point where we would blame environmental factors for an entities behavior instead of an inherent quality. He believed that to solve our crime/prison issues we'd have to come to understand that 'bad' people weren't born bad, but were made bad. We would never do so because then the inverse is obviously true, that 'good' people are not inherently good, but also created by their environment and no 'good' people were ever going to admit that there is not something mentally, spiritually, biologically better about them, thus explaining their success and giving them the right to be scornful of those in the opposite group. I believe that it's it's more productive to label behaviors, not people, but behaviors as productive or not. When a kid steals a candy bar at the local gas station, that behavior is not only labeled bad, but also the child, as only a 'bad' child would even consider stealing, right? That bad label now needs to be punished if the 'good' people are to feel satisfied that justice is to be done. During that punishment we've not only punished the behavior, but as only bad people are punished now explained to this child that he's been moved from the 'good' category to the 'bad' category, and the new label will shadow much of how he feels about himself in the future as well as likely tarnish much of his future behaviors secondary to a self fulfilled prophecy that he's been taught, against his will. See? If we instead look at this behavior as unproductive, and understand that all kids are going to steal at some point (at least the vast majority) and attempt to educate this problem away, then we end up with non of the above negative fallout. Does that make sense? Yes, it's neither good, not bad. It depends on perspective. Not bad, but certainly undesirable, and punishing to the parent, which is a good thing as it predicts less chance of this behavior happening again in the future. I think we can all agree that this is desirable. Again, I think we probably agree more than disagree, but look at the power of words differently in this instance. I would replace 'good' with reinforcing or desirable, and 'bad' with punishing or undesirable as these label behaviors and not people. And I think that that is much more productive. As well, I do believe that my way of thinking fits more into the evolution mold then the religious, as becoming more kind, intuitive, insightful, and 'aware' would seem to be a likely evolutionary step. But how then to explain akflightmedic? He's one of the kindest, progressive thinking people I know, yet lives in the body of an ape? Some thing we may just never understand... Dwayne

Lets change the scenario just a bit, and see if anyone has a different attitude. You are on a cruise to some 3rd world country, you dock, and start enjoying the many amenities and activities that are available. You and your child decide to rent some jet skis, and are having the time of your life when another jetskier (drunk) collides with your jet ski and gives your child a serious head injury. The local hospital is a shack, with no advanced capabilities. There are no neurosurgeons, MRI's, or CT scanners. There is a world renowned Neuro Surgeon from the States on your cruise ship (a passenger like you, on vacation), but he refuses to even look at your child, because he is not covered by his malpractice insurance to treat people in foreign countries, and he lacks the tools that he is accustomed to (so he cant do any good). How do you feel then ?

There is not much to do at a wreck off duty. I, as an interstate/highway driver, would rather that cars pass me and keep the flow of traffic moving out of respect for the other drivers that have places to be. Slowing down, stopping, causing congestion and confusion do not help much. Add that to their inability to positively help the situation, and I say they can keep on truckin'... The only time I could see stopping to help is if there are extreme temperatures. Offering a vehicle for air conditioning would be a nice gesture.

Barring a few rare circumstances, I wouldn't stop at a car crash either. Especially if I didn't witness the accident and there are other people already stopped, I see no reason how my presence there on the side of the highway would do any good at all.

That's the point often thrown out by the other side... "What would you want if you were in their position" That doesn't mean what they do is ok, doesn't make it any less wrong, and in fact it is a detriment to the people that actually WORK to become citizens, instead of sneaking across the border. That is why I am against any and all amnesty plans. You're rewarding criminals, plain and simple. What kind of message does that send to the family in Croatia who's been doing it the legit way trying for 5 years? Is the path to becoming a citizen really hard? Sure. Can it be streamlined a bit? Yea. But so what? Why do some view it as a right to become a citizen in whatever country you want? Why should we extend citizen benefits to any and everyone that asks? Kind of defeats the whole purpose of being a sovereign nation, does it not? And thankfully we have house bill 1868... now just to get those lazy politicians off their butts to close the 14th amendment's loophole about 'birthright' citizenship. Sure, I had it "easy" and won the lottery by getting born to a upper-middle class white American family. So? Does that mean I have to feel bad? Sure as hell doesn't! Does that give me an obligation to help the less fortunate, within my power? Hell yeah, and I do. Paramedic, remember? But I do not, and will not, feel sorry for people who undermine the very principal of this nation, viewing it as their entitled right to live here if they so desire, my country's laws be damned. If you can't respect a country's laws, and can't respect a country, why are you there? You know, the vast majority of the reason why there is so much violence in the middle east is because we aren't a hardcore Islamic nation like some people want. We just can't do anything right, can we?

Having watched the argument/debate/stone-throwing between Dwayne and Ruffems, I am reminded why I sometimes get frustrated with some of the threads. Dwayne, I don’t always disagree with you, but in this case, I will. OK, Ruff’s post didn’t provide ALL the details; however, he did quote his source, and if we disagree, or have more questions, maybe we should look it up, and build a case as to why we disagree. You shot down his post as being crap without truly arguing the other side based on more than opinion. I expected you to come back with “the statistics you gave were inaccurate because on website _____ the federal/state/municipal statistics show that there is racial profiling,” not “offer my passionate, and contrary point of view.” (yes, this last quote was directed at Herbie, but it shows your focus throughout this thread so far). A point of view does not prove another’s wrong. I expect that when someone argues against my posts, that they do it with facts that show my post was in the wrong, not just in a “...lets not spew statistics that seem to make your point but we all know don't actually do so.” Actually, contrary to your statement “of posting irrelevant shit and pretending that it supports your argument,” the site Ruffems quoted has a pretty significant breakdown of the figures, which actually does support his argument. So, let’s take a look at the statistics provided on the Raymore police department: Statewide population over the age of 16 (based on 2007 census) : Whites 83.95% Blacks 10.72% Local population over the age of 16: Whites 90.79% Blacks 4.25% Now, we also have to take into account that Raymore is a trade centre for a large area, and a suburb of Kansas City, and that police stops will include those that don’t live within the limits of Raymore. If we turn the number of stops, searches, and arrests into percentages, we find the following: Percentage of stops: White 88.047% Blacks 9.85% - does this prove racial profiling? Based on the total population percentages, it appears that the police department is not targeting a specific group Percentage of Searches: White 80.94% Black 14.38% - does this prove racial profiling? Maybe – we have to consider if the search was based on plain sight evidence, which is also in the document provided by Ruff.. Percentage of Arrests: White 77.29% Black 17.13% - does this prove racial profiling? Maybe – we have to consider if the search was based on plain sight evidence, and if the arrest was based on scene findings or on a previous warrant, which is also in the document provided by Ruff.. I could go into more and more detail, which could take pages and pages…. The point I am trying to make is that too often I see someone’s post get shot down based on opinion more than fact, and when statistics and links are provided, rather than looking at them and studying them, they use the “stats can say anything” line. It is a shortcut, and a copout, rather than doing the research to effectively argue against the other poster. OK, I am done derailing this thread.

Fort Sam Houston is pretty gay now. Atleast when i went through Charlie Co. 232 medical Battalion....we got smoked every day, they tossed our bays every day, we got mass punished for everything, we got dephased 3 times throughout the cycle, no weekend passes, super fast paced, low passing rate, lots of people fail out, less sleep then basic training, in most cases less then 1 hour personal time. It was a shitty 18 weeks, i would have just done basic training twice instead of going back there for a fresh 18;.

And why can't civilian courts have the same law???? I wholeheartedly agree with that punishment for rape.