Honestly, even in the US the odds are vanishingly small that some creep in a grocery store has a concealed handgun. It’s just the possibility of it creates paranoia.
2 Likes
Maybe talk to the manager in case they have surveillance tapes. Groper might be known to them.
This is actually really smart.
I’m generally in favor of confrontation except in situations where it would obviously put you in danger. Most people act like assholes precisely because they rarely get any push back. They’re actually cowards.
1 Like
What if it wouldn’t obviously put you in danger, but it might put you in danger. Let’s say 10%.
I’m a coward too. A different kind of coward, but I’m sure I meet the definition in some circumstances.
WAAF fucked us.
https://twitter.com/skdh/status/1475745429958635521
After the year 1850, the use of sentiment-laden words in Google Books declined systematically, while the use of words associated with fact-based argumentation rose steadily. This pattern reversed in the 1980s, and this change accelerated around 2007, when across languages, the frequency of fact-related words dropped while emotion-laden language surged, a trend paralleled by a shift from collectivistic to individualistic language.
Importantly, the trend reversal we find has its origins decades before the rise of social media, suggesting that while social media may have been an amplifier other factors must have driven the stagnation of the long-term rise of rationality around 1975 to 1980 and triggered its reversal. Perhaps a feeling that the world is run in an unfair way started to emerge in the late 1970s when results of neoliberal policies became clear (23⇓–25) and became amplified with the rise of the internet and especially social media. A central role of discontent would be consistent with the rise in language characteristic of so-called cognitive distortions (39) known in psychology as overly negative attitudes toward oneself, the world, and the future (40⇓⇓–43). If disillusion with “the system” is indeed the core driver, a loss of interest in the rationality that helped build and defend the system could perhaps be collateral damage.
1 Like
I also think that the overlap between gropers and people who carry guns in order to respond to perceived threats is fairly low.
His wife probably told him he’d never need to use chains so he’s got 'em on to prove a point.
Do you know when he parked? Because the roads looked a lot different a 7 this morning.
There could be a reasonable explanation for that. If he lives somewhere that is unplowed and has hills, then driving the last 500m might actually require chains. If the rest of the drive isn’t too long, you might as well just keep them on for the return trip.
I think a person who is sexually assaulted has a right to escalate the situation, especially in a public place.
Furthermore, I’d bet money that most gropers are huge cowards who would crumble during any confrontation.
I’m absolutely never going to call someone out for being over prepared for winter driving.
Let @clovis8 have it. Since the US started competing with us in hockey this winter driving thing and health care sanity are our big things.
1 Like
While we’re taking about hockey, what’s with the avatar? Canadian Rangers fan seems a bit weird. Did you lose a bet or something?
1 Like
I am indeed the only Rangers fan in all of Canada. The case is currently with our Supreme Court (mosdef v. Ontario) to determine if this invalidates my access to universal health care. Pray for me.
8 Likes
I imagine the canadian supreme court is just a bunch of mounties in hockey jerseys apologizing to each other
5 Likes
Carry a firearm and execute him on the spot. Decapitate him and perch his head above the store entrance as a warning to other would-be gropers. Finally, send a bill for the bullet to his estate to cover your expenses. IANAL, so you might want to check up on your local laws first.
2 Likes
2 Likes
If you could focus hard on anyone and give them a fatal heart attack. Even just a video. Obviously zero chance it could ever be connected to you.
Would you be a mass murderer?
Maybe I’d change my mind after I did it, but hypothetically my answer is yes my justification would be the type of people I’m taking out would save lives