Charlie Kirk Shot and killed

[appvol]

 

[Orange_Crush]

---
I asked AI to summarize

* **Fentanyl Concentration is Not a Reliable Indicator of Death:** The amount of fentanyl in a person's blood is not a definitive measure for determining cause of death, especially because tolerance varies widely among individuals, particularly chronic users.

* **Norfentanyl Indicates Metabolism:** Norfentanyl is a metabolite that the body produces as it breaks down fentanyl. Its presence can show chronic use and a higher tolerance to the drug.

* **The Fentanyl-to-Norfentanyl Ratio is Crucial:** The ratio of fentanyl to norfentanyl is more informative in an overdose case. A high ratio suggests an acute, lethal dose, while a low ratio indicates that the body has had time to metabolize the drug.

* **Case-Specific Findings:** In this particular case, the ratio was quite low, even lower than the average found in people who were alive and driving under the influence of fentanyl. It was also significantly lower than the average ratio found in overdose deaths.

Well, I can honestly and confidently say that you will find no fentanyl in my system, norfentynol.

 

[Rickyvol77]

"Cheering for murder" apparently equals victims of a right wing lynch mob.

"Cheering for murder" apparently does not == "thought police who seem to think it's beneficial to kill people for their opinions".


Also, for the record... Per your link, it does not say that 1000s of people have been fired; just that they have been collated, documented and accused.

The videos and comments and tik toks that the PEOPLE THEMSELVES posted in public forums are linked...I encourage you to see what they said and why their employers fired them

 

[Orange_Crush]

The videos and comments and tik toks that the PEOPLE THEMSELVES posted in public forums are linked...I encourage you to see what they said and why their employers fired them

I am not weighing in on the truth of the statement, just that it's not supported by the link. That's all.

Perhaps tens of thousands of liberals did just that. Thousands of them may have been fired for it. I would not be surprised in either case. But we just don't really know from the link alone whether thousands have been fired. That's all I'm saying.

 

[luthervol]

So you said the numbers were made up and exaggerated by "right wing media" and then when I showed you you were wrong, it switched to "accused by right wing lynch mob"

These firings were in the thousands and were "normal" liberals that were teachers, doctors, nurses, lawyers, business people etc. And not because they "said mean things" but because they were actively cheering on a murder of someone for their politics. The videos were there and I saw a lot myself which is why I knew I was correct.

Maybe next time step out of your bubble and experience what is actually out there and you won't be wrong so often with your takes.

There have not been thousands of firings. So that is your claim?!?!?!
Then once again, you are horribly wrong.
Read the link you provided

 

[LouderVol]

Of course you're not guaranteed equality. Life's not fair! Which is precisely why people should be.

what is fair?

think about group projects at school. what inevitably happens in most of them.

there is one or two people who do all the work. maybe one other person who is present but not really helpful, and then the inevitable slacker who does nothing.

"fair" would be the two who did the work get the credit, the one who at least showed up, gets partial, while the slacker gets nothing.

Equity would give them all the same grade, thats not fair at all.

 

[Orange_Crush]

what is fair?

...

@luthervol

Inquiring minds and all.

 

[RockyTop85]

You didn’t mention the ratio. You mentioned something else. Idk why that’s difficult to understand.

Okay, then I’ll just say that this discussion has convinced me that simplifying the discussion was the correct decision and we can move on.

 

[Rickyvol77]

what is fair?

think about group projects at school. what inevitably happens in most of them.

there is one or two people who do all the work. maybe one other person who is present but not really helpful, and then the inevitable slacker who does nothing.

"fair" would be the two who did the work get the credit, the one who at least showed up, gets partial, while the slacker gets nothing.

Equity would give them all the same grade, thats not fair at all.

Some people don't believe in this, they want to reward the slacker and punish success in the name of "fairness"

 

[luthervol]

@luthervol

Inquiring minds and all.

A little like beauty. It's in the eyes of the beholder.
But if you need a definition...........
adjective

1. 1.
   impartial and just, without favoritism or discrimination.
   "the group has achieved fair and equal representation for all its members"

 

[Vol8188]

Real things being reported by UK Daily Mail.

1. The shooter played a game called “Furry Shades of Gay”

2. The shooter followed anime artists known for pedophilic anime content.

As a country we really have to accept that porn addiction and hedonism in general destroys lives. If your son starts banging a man who thinks he’s a woman and dresses like an animal, you shouldn’t embrace his lifestyle nor condemn him. You should immediately seek treatment the same way you would if your kid was having hallucinations.

 

[Vol8188]

Okay, then I’ll just say that this discussion has convinced me that simplifying the discussion was the correct decision and we can move on.

You can’t proclaim something to be a simplification if it completely changes the meaning. That’s what you did. You provided a different data point. A data point that Floyd was in the top end of and then proclaimed you were using it as a simplification for a different data point.

 

[Orange_Crush]

A little like beauty. It's in the eyes of the beholder.
But if you need a definition...........
adjective

1. 1.
   impartial and just, without favoritism or discrimination.
   "the group has achieved fair and equal representation for all its members"

That definition relies on the concept of "just". To be swayed to your argument, we'll need to have an idea about your perceived ability to know reality, and the standard by which you judge it. (I mean, to have you as an instructor, we'll need to know your capabilities and expertise. Yes?)

You seem to indicate above that your moral code is opinion. Why would your opinion be better than anyone else's? Why would your opinion be better than mine? Or Hitler's? Or Stalin's?

Seems like this is indeed the thread to discuss it since you keep posting about it here.

OK. Insults are not a way of changing hearts and minds.

If you change your mind about walking away from hard questions...

Let's try it this way.

(1a) What are humans and how did we get here? We can work from there.







On the "wrong", morality issue...

(1b) You've indicated that as society changed and slavery became immoral, society evolved to improve. That's a comparative statement, so you'll need to let us in on the standard that you are judging against. If a non-slavery society is more moral than slavery society, what standard are you using to make that judgment? It would need to be a standard outside of society, and outside of yourself?

(2b) You've indicated that society defines morality. If you seek to change society, what would that make you? And why? (If morality is a social agreement, and you are trying to break that agreement...?)

(3b) If you were talking to the mother of a toddler, and she asked you whether raping and eating her toddler is objectively wrong at all times and at all places, no matter the opinion of one person or all persons, what would you tell her? That it is wrong merely as an evolving social construct, and it is wrong in a similar way that it is wrong when a dog does not circle before pooping? Do you have grandkids, by the way?


These questions work together, in case you haven't started noticing. What is a human? Merely the product of time and chance? A weak, hairless animal? A blip on the universe's timescale with no objective or lasting worth? Merely a meat computer that should be treated the same as your laptop? Use it for whatever you find beneficial, and throw it in the dumpster if it stops serving its purpose? If not, why not?

What is a human? Just the product of unguided change over time via random gene mutations? Then what makes you think that you evolved the ability to correctly perceive and interpret reality around you? What part of "Survival of the Fittest" gave you reason to believe that you developed these capabilities?



It seems that, if you want to intellectually and morally change people around you, you should be ready to defend your underpinnings if they lift the hood of your worldview and start asking questions. Right?



I belabor these things because I'd like to weigh how firm a foundation your philosophical worldview is to be trusted as an agent of change, whether here or in society at large. One would think you would invite that, what with your desire to be a catalyst of change.

I appreciate your patience.

 

[LouderVol]

A little like beauty. It's in the eyes of the beholder.
But if you need a definition...........
adjective

1. 1.
   impartial and just, without favoritism or discrimination.
   "the group has achieved fair and equal representation for all its members"

but how does that work with outcomes as in equity?

Equity says the outcome should be equal regardless of anything else. how is that possibly fair?

another example you won't even try to touch.

the two of us go out to lunch, I order the steak, a couple drinks, and desert. you have sandwich and water. when it comes time to split the check the equitable outcome would be to split it 50/50. but that would never be fair to you.

so which do you care about? Equity or fairness?

 

[Vol8188]

Our “love is love” and “as long as it’s consensual” stance that the majority of Americans take towards sexual deviation has serious negative consequences for the young men of this country

 

[luthervol]

That definition relies on the concept of "just". To be swayed to your argument, we'll need to have an idea about your perceived ability to know reality, and the standard by which you judge it. Yes? (I mean, to have you as an instructor, we'll need to know your capabilities and expertise. Yes?)

You seem to indicate above that your moral code is opinion. Why would your opinion be better than anyone else's? Why would your opinion be better than mine? Or Hitler's? Or Stalin's?

Seems like this is indeed the thread to discuss it since you keep posting about it here.

Not happening.
I answered your 1a and told you to take it from there.....in another thread starting with your response to the same question.

That's where I'm at and will continue to be.

 

[KB5252]

---
I asked AI to summarize

* **Fentanyl Concentration is Not a Reliable Indicator of Death:** The amount of fentanyl in a person's blood is not a definitive measure for determining cause of death, especially because tolerance varies widely among individuals, particularly chronic users.

* **Norfentanyl Indicates Metabolism:** Norfentanyl is a metabolite that the body produces as it breaks down fentanyl. Its presence can show chronic use and a higher tolerance to the drug.

* **The Fentanyl-to-Norfentanyl Ratio is Crucial:** The ratio of fentanyl to norfentanyl is more informative in an overdose case. A high ratio suggests an acute, lethal dose, while a low ratio indicates that the body has had time to metabolize the drug.

* **Case-Specific Findings:** In this particular case, the ratio was quite low, even lower than the average found in people who were alive and driving under the influence of fentanyl. It was also significantly lower than the average ratio found in overdose deaths.

Fair enough, my next question would be were their any other drugs in his system at levels high enough to contribute to his death? I'm positive this was addressed in the autopsy, just thinking out loud here. That and his other morbidities made him a ticking time bomb under the right (wrong in this case) situation and the officers provided it. Multiple levels of failure on their part.

I understand the use of the knee in certain situations, it should really only be used to gain control and cuff, if they continue to struggle just restrain them with other means, hobble etc. officers jobs are extremely difficult, taxing work. But indifference and a knee that long combined with his other issues and excited delirium all played a part.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Not happening.
I answered your 1a and told you to take it from there.....in another thread starting with your response to the same question.

That's where I'm at and will continue to be.

1a? Let me see, I think I recall you saying that humans are merely the product of evolution? The product of time and random mutations?

Then, again. What gives you the belief that your (or my) intellect is trustworthy? What gives you the idea that you correctly perceive reality? I mean, the first order of business for you to be any kind of authority on anything, for anyone else, would be the idea that you can correctly perceive and process objective reality. And the first test of that would be whether you even have sufficient cause to believe that about yourself. No?

We can just gnaw on that bone right here before wading into the apparent hypocrisy of you instructing us on the need for a "justice" that is based on personal opinion, and is no more binding or factual than personal opinions about beauty.

(I say right here since you believe this thread the appropriate place to call us to justice, thus it is logically the place to discuss that. I will patiently await your feedback on 1a before we delve into the follow-ups. Thank you in advance.)

So, again... What part of the concept of "chance/randomness" gives you faith that you are an actual rational being who can correctly perceive and process true reality around you? TIA.

 

[RockyTop85]

You can’t proclaim something to be a simplification if it completely changes the meaning. That’s what you did. You provided a different data point. A data point that Floyd was in the top end of and then proclaimed you were using it as a simplification for a different data point.

You keep saying I can’t.

Clearly I can. I did. I’ve explained why I did it and why it wasn’t misleading. I probably will do so again.

I just won’t argue with you about it next time.

 

[McDad]

Fair enough, my next question would be were their any other drugs in his system at levels high enough to contribute to his death? I'm positive this was addressed in the autopsy, just thinking out loud here. That and his other morbidities made him a ticking time bomb under the right (wrong in this case) situation and the officers provided it. Multiple levels of failure on their part.

I understand the use of the knee in certain situations, it should really only be used to gain control and cuff, if they continue to struggle just restrain them with other means, hobble etc. officers jobs are extremely difficult, taxing work. But indifference and a knee that long combined with his other issues and excited delirium all played a part.

May I give you a hypothetical?

An old man cuts you off in traffic and you, in a rage, ram his car. The impact violently slams his head into the side window. It crushes his skull but it's hard to know if it was fatal because he had a heart attack too. He had a history of heart attacks and TIAs. He was doa when ems arrived.

Did you kill him?

 

[Vol8188]

You keep saying I can’t.

Clearly I can. I did. I’ve explained why I did it and why it wasn’t misleading. I probably will do so again.

I just won’t argue with you about it next time.

Sure. You can. Sorry, “I was trying to simplify it for you”. Here’s the longer version.

You can say illogical things. You have that right. By “cannot” what I mean is not that you’re incapable. You are clearly (as evidenced by this discussion) very capable of saying illogical things. But rather, I mean that by saying something different than what you meant, you did not actually achieve your stated goal of “simplification”. But rather you brought up a completely different data point that does not actually help your argument.

 

[Orange_Crush]

 

[Vol8188]

Fair enough, my next question would be were their any other drugs in his system at levels high enough to contribute to his death? I'm positive this was addressed in the autopsy, just thinking out loud here. That and his other morbidities made him a ticking time bomb under the right (wrong in this case) situation and the officers provided it. Multiple levels of failure on their part.

I understand the use of the knee in certain situations, it should really only be used to gain control and cuff, if they continue to struggle just restrain them with other means, hobble etc. officers jobs are extremely difficult, taxing work. But indifference and a knee that long combined with his other issues and excited delirium all played a part.

Some important notes too.

1. Enlarged heart is a risk factor for sudden cardiac death. It’s one of the many things we screen children for with sports physicals in an effort to reduce the number of kids who die of sudden cardiac death during sporting events and/or practices.

2. Methamphetamine users often have insane hypertension. I have them come in all the time with systolic pressure of 220-240. Levels like 240/120 are fairly common and these are in people who have not smoked in 2-3 days (granted I’m taking their word for that).

3. Fentanyl is known (like all opiates) to reduce respiratory drive.

So when we add this up he had a heart that required more blood flow than most hearts due to its enlargement (likely caused by years of drugs abuse), he likely had blood pressure that was insanely high increasing the demand on his heart, and he would have a low respiratory rate meaning his O2 levels would likely be reduced. On top of that his O2 levels would likely be chronically reduced by years of tobacco, marijuana, and meth smoke.

So he had a heart that needed more oxygen due to its size, was getting less oxygen due to opiate abuse and years of smoking, was having to work harder due to insane HTN. That’s all just baseline before he starts panicking.

You add his panicked state into the equation and that demand goes up in a body that’s physically incapable of meeting such a demand.

Edit: one additional factor I forgot add is the enlarged heart not only needs more oxygen but is also less capable of delivering oxygen to itself and the rest of the body because the enlarged ventricle shrinks the interior cavity. Meaning the heart fills with less blood and delivers less blood with each pump.

 

[Orange_Crush]

May I give you a hypothetical?

An old man cuts you off in traffic and you, in a rage, ram his car. The impact violently slams his head into the side window. It crushes his skull but it's hard to know if it was fatal because he had a heart attack too. He had a history of heart attacks and TIAs. He was doa when ems arrived.

Did you kill him?

A skydiver with covid has a parachute failure. That's a covid death.

 

[whodeycin85]

May I give you a hypothetical?

An old man cuts you off in traffic and you, in a rage, ram his car. The impact violently slams his head into the side window. It crushes his skull but it's hard to know if it was fatal because he had a heart attack too. He had a history of heart attacks and TIAs. He was doa when ems arrived.

Did you kill him?

In that case yes... In the Floyd car chaviun was using his training...I believe he was over charged.. Should have been the lowest murder charges possible with neglect... That may be the case I haven't looked that deep in a while