On Cowards and Heroes

[ok doser]

By any measure, who are we to judge the actions of others if we haven't been subjected to the same trials and tribulations!

i've never aborted a child, but i have no trouble judging as wrong the actions of those who do

 

[jgarden]

i've never aborted a child, but i have no trouble judging as wrong the actions of those who do

In 16thC Bolivia, the native mothers either aborted their children or deliberately broke the legs of a male child so that they wouldn't be consigned to the silver and mercury mines by the Spaniards - which in itself was a sure death sentence.

The proLife supporters have created the stereotype that those who choose abortion as all callous and unloving. In some cases they may be correct, but in others it must a horrendous decision where there is only hopeless - as was the case with these Bolivian mothers.

 

[chair]

by your measure, since i have never been in david's position, i have no standing to call him courageous

I have no idea if you are courageous or a coward. Your obsession with calling the victims of a terrorist attack "cowards" does tell me something about your character- and it is not a positive trait.

 

[ok doser]

Your obsession with calling the victims of a terrorist attack "cowards" ...

not all of them


just the ones who acted cowardly

 

[ok doser]

Heroes:

Teen faces 15 charges after knife rampage at Pickering school


PICKERING - A 14-year-old girl who allegedly moved through the corridors of her high school brandishing knives and wounding both staff and students is now facing 15 criminal charges, police said Wednesday.

Durham Regional Police laid the charges 24 hours after the stabbing at Dunbarton High School in Pickering, which left seven people with non-serious injuries.

Police said five students and two staff members were hurt in the attack, revising the figures of six students and three staff offered by the Durham District School Board on Tuesday night.

The girl, who cannot be named under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, is facing seven counts of assault with a weapon and six counts of assault causing bodily harm. She is also charged with possessing a dangerous weapon and assault.

She was scheduled to attend a bail hearing on Wednesday morning, the outcome of which was not known.

Dunbarton High was open for classes on Wednesday 24 hours after chaos reigned in the hallways.

The knife attack, which police say began after 8 a.m., sent students and teachers running for cover. Witnesses described seeing a girl running down school hallways waving a knife in each hand.

One emotional 14-year-old girl said she came face-to-face with the suspect, who slashed at her with the knives.

"I just ran for my life," the girl said as she began to cry. "I just can't believe it happened. She almost got me."

Another student said the scene hardly seemed real.

"People were running and screaming. There was blood on the ground. I thought it was fake."

Police credited two staff members with thwarting any further attacks by wrestling the girl to the ground and holding her there until officers arrived.

"We're giving kudos to the staff members that stopped this before it got worse," Sgt. Bill Calder said after the incident. "They did the right thing."

Investigators said in a release they did not believe any particular student or staff member was targeted in the attack.

"She appeared to be acting alone," Calder said.

 

[ok doser]

London Bridge attack: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/03/london-bridge-everything-know-far/


three loser moosies drive a van into pedestrians, hop out and start stabbing people

for their trouble, they get shot full of holes



heroes:

Crowds in the bars fought back - hurling pint glasses, bottles and chairs at the attackers. One woman was stabbed repeatedly, according to Gerard Vowls, who was trying to drive the attacker away by hurling chairs at him. A security guard who works across multiple bars and pubs in Borough Market told the BBC he saw the attackers after receiving a call from a colleague in another bar who said people had been stabbed. The security guard described people running away screaming from three men. He and his colleagues tried to throw chairs at the attackers, who were going in and out of different bars.

not heroes:

The security guard described people running away screaming from three men.

definitely not heroes:

Panic spread through a throng viewing the Champions League soccer final in a Turin square on Saturday and prompted a stampede that injured more than 1,000, authorities said. http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/04/europe/italy-soccer-stampede/

 

[ok doser]

Hero:

Vickie Williams-Tillman, Good Samaritan who swarmed man attacking Baton Rouge police officer


Vickie Williams-Tillman was on her way to Sam's Club and Walmart early Sunday morning, listening to gospel music, when she noticed a police officer struggling with a man on the side of Harry Drive.

She rolled down her window to ask if the officer needed help, but she couldn't hear him respond. She did, however, lock eyes with him.

"I could see in his eyes he needed help," said Williams-Tillman. "You don't have time to think about it … I did what God needed me to do."

And what Williams-Tillman did — jumping on the attacker's back until more police arrived — has many in the community, including the mayor, hailing the 56-year-old as a hero.

https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_r...cle_6ba40fd2-f6e8-11e6-b5f9-cf5f3c028852.html

that's her on the left

 

[ok doser]

the key to understanding this thread:

Should we celebrate and acknowledge great acts of courage? Of course. We simply shouldn't expect those acts to define the normal or expected

why not?

why not expect great things of our young people?

i worked with young boy scouts for years and we celebrated acts of courage and trained our boys to be prepared to meet challenging situations, not to run away in fear

why shouldn't we expect that to be normal?

 

[Town Heretic]

Other than the lifted bits of writing from me that Sod has used in the thread prior that I missed I haven't actually had any hand in this thread until now. The bit he lifted was from something I wrote in another thread in 2015.

If you want to really understand what Sod/doser's thread is about I give you a better angle on both of us. The first bit is his actual OP and the second, the full text of what I wrote in 2015 with the sliver he tried to use set in bold.

Here's the OP again in all its glory:

I'll come back to this later to support my statement that most of the victims in the Umpqua shooting (as well as the Colorado movie theater shooting) acted cowardly
I plan to use dictionary definitions! :banana:
and logical analysis!! :banana::banana:

i expect my opponents will use emotion :darwinsm:

go ahead and start if you like, i have a test looming and a paper to write, but i will be back

That's the spirit with which he enters into the matter. Mocking defamation and libel of the dead. And it's why until today the only work of mine you find here is what he's truncated to drag in.

Here's what I had to say in 2015:

No one who witnessed 911 responders rushing into harms way, or has heard the tales of members of the armed forces winning medals of valor for placing their lives in jeopardy to defend their fellows could be confused on the point of their personal courage. And we've all heard of family members casting aside the thought of personal safety to protect their loved ones. More rarely, people will rise to a moment in defense of friends. Rarest of all, doing so for strangers sans that military or other training on the point.

But most people in those situations don't respond heroically. Overwhelmingly, they don't. And there's no cowardice in an absence of heroism.

In fact, most soldiers, men trained to respond to that sort of thing, don't receive medals of valor. Most who do meet the moment heroically, the vast majority of that overwhelming minority do so in defense of people they've been trained to protect in situations they've been drilled to respond to in ways the rest of us simply aren't.

We shouldn't confuse or conflate the absence of that action and training with cowardice or play word games to defame the dead. If you haven't had the training you're likely going to respond instinctively and most of the time that's going to mean you'll put as much distance as you can between you and a lethal instrument. That isn't cowardice. That's a very understandable and human reaction.

Should we celebrate and acknowledge great acts of courage? Of course. We simply shouldn't expect those acts to define the normal or expected or cast aspersions on those who fail to meet that mark, as most do and will. If professional soldiers don't typically manage it, the chance of you doing it without that training are slim.

If you haven't found yourself confronted with violence, you can't know how you'll respond to it. For most of you the answer won't look like it does for a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And there's no shame in that. There is shame and a sort of cowardice in attacking the defenseless though and their reputations. So try not to do that if you can help yourself.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Other than the lifted bits of writing from me that Sod has used in the thread prior that I missed I haven't actually had any hand in this thread until now. The bit he lifted was from something I wrote in another thread in 2015.

If you want to really understand what Sod/doser's thread is about I give you a better angle on both of us. The first bit is his actual OP and the second, the full text of what I wrote in 2015 with the sliver he tried to use set in bold.

Here's the OP again in all its glory:


That's the spirit with which he enters into the matter. Mocking defamation and libel of the dead. And it's why until today the only work of mine you find here is what he's truncated to drag in.

Here's what I had to say in 2015:

Let's face it, he's only here to troll and getting people to rise to bait is part and parcel of that. It's pitiable in one sense but on a topic concerning people who have died through terrorism and tragedy it's another thing altogether. He's pathetic, a pathological obsessive and just not worth bothering with. He'll get his kicks from an indirect response like this but that's the last he'll get from me from here on in on that score as well.

 

[ok doser]

Other than the lifted bits of writing from me that Sod has used in the thread prior that I missed I haven't actually had any hand in this thread until now.

right - that's all been covered in the thread - you were invited to participate several times and in every case, chose instead to make a comment in your "I'm so proud of myself!" thread and lock it so i couldn't respond

If you want to really understand what Sod/doser's thread is about I give you a better angle on both of us. The first bit is his actual OP ....

...which anybody can access by clicking on Page 1 and scrolling to the top

Mocking defamation and libel of the dead.

point 1. I challenge you to find a single post of mine in which i mock the dead
point 2. for somebody who pretends to be a lawyer, you have an abysmal understanding of legal terminology
point 3. the legal definition of "defamation" requires falsehood - i have proven my argument with logical analysis and dictionary definitions
point 4. the legal definition of "libel" rests on "defamatory", thus supra, point 3

point 5. if you disagree with point 3, that I have proven my argument with logical analysis and dictionary definitions, by all means join in the conversation

but leave your emotional arguments outside

or expect to be mocked :idunno:

 

[ok doser]

Let's face it, he's only here to troll and getting people to rise to bait is part and parcel of that. It's pitiable in one sense but on a topic concerning people who have died through terrorism and tragedy it's another thing altogether. He's pathetic, a pathological obsessive and just not worth bothering with. He'll get his kicks from an indirect response like this but that's the last he'll get from me from here on in on that score as well.

you too have been invited to participate artie, several times, but you've always run like a little girl with a skinned knee

just like you're doing now

 

[ok doser]

Here's what I had to say in 2015:

and here's my rebuttal from 2015:

No one who witnessed 911 responders rushing into harms way, or has heard the tales of members of the armed forces winning medals of valor for placing their lives in jeopardy to defend their fellows could be confused on the point of their personal courage.

true

and totally irrelevant to the situation under consideration

And we've all heard of family members casting aside the thought of personal safety to protect their loved ones. More rarely, people will rise to a moment in defense of friends. Rarest of all, doing so for strangers sans that military or other training on the point.

again true

and again, irrelevant

but you did get to slip in "sans" :chuckle:

and "on the point" :chuckle:

impressive as all get out! :thumb:

too bad you couldn't manage a "the compact" or "the holy"

But most people in those situations don't respond heroically.

which situations?

the ones you're referring to that are irrelevant?

how about addressing the situation at hand, where a classroom of students was locked in with a gun totin' retard?

Overwhelmingly, they don't. And there's no cowardice in an absence of heroism.

well, let's see what the boys at oxford have to say about that:

coward, n. ... one who displays ... want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty

oxford sez you're wrong

sorry :idunno:

In fact, most soldiers, men trained to respond to that sort of thing, don't receive medals of valor. Most who do meet the moment heroically, the vast majority of that overwhelming minority do so in defense of people they've been trained to protect in situations they've been drilled to respond to in ways the rest of us simply aren't.

again, irrelevant

We shouldn't confuse or conflate the absence of that action and training with cowardice

a soldier who allows his fear to prevent him from acting courageously is indeed a coward

or play word games to defame the dead.

now this is one reason i tend to doubt your claims to an education in the law

first year law school should have taught you that a necessary component of defamation is falsehood

that you are ignorant of this tends to make one suspect that your bonafides aren't quite what you claim :think:

or maybe you just slept through first year law :idunno:

If you haven't had the training you're likely going to respond instinctively and most of the time that's going to mean you'll put as much distance as you can between you and a lethal instrument. That isn't cowardice.

it is if others are dying and might have been saved if you had acted courageously instead of fearfully

That's a very understandable and human reaction.

for humans that have been conditioned by society to act like fearful sheep, yes

Should we celebrate and acknowledge great acts of courage? Of course. We simply shouldn't expect those acts to define the normal or expected

why not?

why not expect great things of our young people?

i worked with young boy scouts for years and we celebrated acts of courage and trained our boys to be prepared to meet challenging situations, not to run away in fear

why shouldn't we expect that to be normal?

or cast aspersions on those who fail to meet that mark

i call it "describing their actions according to dictionary definitions"

if you think it casts aspersions on their cowardly behavior, well then, that's just you letting your emotions rule you :idunno:

If you haven't found yourself confronted with violence, you can't know how you'll respond to it.

one can't "know" anything about the future

if, on the other hand, you have been trained to be prepared to confront evil, to put aside your fear in an emergency situation? then you can have greater confidence that you won't respond in a way that will meet the dictionary definition of "cowardly"

For most of you the answer won't look like it does for a Congressional Medal of Honor winner. And there's no shame in that.

there is shame if you let your fear prevent you from confronting a threat and instead watch your classmates get slaughtered

There is shame and a sort of cowardice in attacking the defenseless though and their reputations.

another unsupportable assertion from emotion

So try not to do that if you can help yourself.

right - let's not have a conversation about how cowardly it is to cower in fear while your classmates get slaughtered :kookoo:

 

[Town Heretic]

and here's my rebuttal from 2015:

Most of what follows doesn't even resemble rebuttal, is a string of declarations in lieu of substantive engagement in route to old schtick questioning the fact of my being a lawyer, a thing settled when I offered a lifetime ban challenge upon production of my credentials to the site owner and noted one other member here in good standing, AMR, could bear witness to them. Doser ran like a river.

Then more declaration in route to laughing at vocabulary choices. If you've read doser enough you can understand why that bothers him, but it doesn't really matter.

Then this skewing:

how about addressing the situation at hand, where a classroom of students was locked in with a gun totin' retard?

Of course this was an editorial in a thread and not the pretend conversation Sod was having or is pretending to have in route to editing a dictionary definition to attempt what reason won't allow.

well, let's see what the boys at oxford have to say about that:

coward, n.... one who displays ... want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty

oxford sez you're wrong

No, it doesn't. Here it is from the link you left:

1. A reproachful designation for one who displays ignoble fear or want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty; an ignobly faint-hearted or pusillanimous person.

An ignoble fear or want of courage. I'd tell you to look up despicable, but I assume you own a mirror.

Doser is a paper tiger who without a test of mettle has decided to judge those who were in a situation he can only imagine, many of whom gave their lives to save others.

And that's the last of my contribution to this fraud of a thread and his ongoing obsession.

 

[ok doser]

Most of what follows doesn't even resemble rebuttal, is a string of declarations in lieu of substantive engagement in route to old schtick questioning the fact of my being a lawyer, a thing settled when I offered a lifetime ban challenge upon production of my credentials to the site owner and noted one other member here in good standing, AMR, could bear witness to them. Doser ran like a river.

Then more declaration in route to laughing at vocabulary choices. If you've read doser enough you can understand why that bothers him, but it doesn't really matter.

Then this skewing:

Of course this was an editorial in a thread and not the pretend conversation Sod was having or is pretending to have in route to editing a dictionary definition to attempt what reason won't allow.


No, it doesn't. Here it is from the link you left:

1. A reproachful designation for one who displays ignoble fear or want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty; an ignobly faint-hearted or pusillanimous person.

An ignoble fear or want of courage. I'd tell you to look up despicable, but I assume you own a mirror.

Doser is a paper tiger who without a test of mettle has decided to judge those who were in a situation he can only imagine, many of whom gave their lives to save others.

And that's the last of my contribution to this fraud of a thread and his ongoing obsession.

wasn't that just a wonderful display of emotional outburst! :first:


thanks for playing :wave2:

 

[ok doser]

... questioning the fact of my being a lawyer, a thing settled when I offered a lifetime ban challenge upon production of my credentials to the site owner and noted one other member here in good standing, AMR, could bear witness to them. Doser ran like a river....

for those who want the measure of the man, here's a couple links to show how it really played out:


http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...TOL-For-Life&p=4620168&viewfull=1#post4620168

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...y-defensible&p=4620182&viewfull=1#post4620182


and i'll throw it back at you, again

a challenge to you, with the loser accepting a permaban from the site

this was your claim:

I can absolutely prove without equivocation that I am and have been for some time a lawyer in good standing before the bar.

my counterclaim is simple - you absolutely cannot prove to me without equivocation that you are and have been for some time a lawyer in good standing before the bar

 

[ok doser]

1. A reproachful designation for one who displays ignoble fear or want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty; an ignobly faint-hearted or pusillanimous person.

An ignoble fear or want of courage.

so you're proposing that those students who cowered in fear while their classmates were being slaughtered in front of them were displaying a noble fear or want of courage? :freak:

 

[eider]

for those who want the measure of the man.........

I expect that some of us are more interested in the measure of you.........

Now, let's dump your definition here, thus:-
coward, n. ... one who displays ... want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty

This word has always interested me, along with the people who chuck it about.

I need you to explain what you might do in a couple of scenarios....... ok?

1. You are on a shopping trip to your local Food Market. You only have your handbag and you are pushing a selections trolley along the back aisle with a few items already collected. You hear a lot of shouting at the front of the store and a loud bang (probably a gunshot), followed by another. People start screaming and then there is another loud bang. A young man runs into your view, runs up to a Fire Escape door close by, pushes the panic-bar and runs out of the store and away. More people run past you and go out through that door, and away.You are standing five feet from this same door, and now there are more loud bangs happening at the front of the store. What would you like to do?
1. Go forward to the front of shop to diccover what is happening?
2. Continue shopping..... you have a lot more selections to make.
3. Go out through the fire escape and away?
4. Any other action you might think of?

:idunno:

 

[eider]

Doser ran like a river.

You know well that you never needed to bother with such proof of your qualifications.
In time our posts show the world who and what we are.

And a person who throws the word 'coward' at any fight/flight/collapse response to danger is despicable, imo.

The hero/coward/ definitions are mostly used depending on whether friends or enemies responded. Any example can work:- A military commander who gives the order to retreat from an advancing enemy force is a contemptible yellow bellied coward if he's an enemy, a wise and experienced soldier if he's a friend.

The word 'liar' can often be used in the same way.

 

[ok doser]

I expect that some of us are more interested in the measure of you.........

Now, let's dump your definition here, thus:-
coward, n. ... one who displays ... want of courage in the face of danger, pain, or difficulty

This word has always interested me, along with the people who chuck it about.

I need you to explain what you might do in a couple of scenarios....... ok?

1. You are on a shopping trip to your local Food Market. You only have your handbag and you are pushing a selections trolley along the back aisle with a few items already collected. You hear a lot of shouting at the front of the store and a loud bang (probably a gunshot), followed by another. People start screaming and then there is another loud bang. A young man runs into your view, runs up to a Fire Escape door close by, pushes the panic-bar and runs out of the store and away. More people run past you and go out through that door, and away.You are standing five feet from this same door, and now there are more loud bangs happening at the front of the store. What would you like to do?
1. Go forward to the front of shop to diccover what is happening?
2. Continue shopping..... you have a lot more selections to make.
3. Go out through the fire escape and away?
4. Any other action you might think of?

:idunno:

what would a hero do?