lol @ American law enforcement

[Seth]

They probably were going to buy drugs.

I took a look at their route from the Gator Bar to where they were found. It doesn't make sense that they were going to the IHOP.

Highly likely, I'd say.

[Svartalf]

How do you figure?

You weren't there, don't really know, and accuse them straight of being druggies whose deal went wrong.

[Gallstones]

Most people are murdered by someone they know, usually a significant other or family member.

I kind of thought most people weren't murdered at all....

Ahem............

I kinda thought your truism was kinda funny....you're annoyed by that?????

Why do you assume I'm annoyed?

I'm playing along.

[MrJonno]

So Seth you have a gas mask in case of a gas attack, suppose you have a nuclear bomb shelter in case of war as well!

[Seth]

How do you figure?

You weren't there, don't really know, and accuse them straight of being druggies whose deal went wrong.

Of everyone, he's best qualified to make the inference, since he lives there and has driven the route.

Druggies or drunken idiots, in either case they are likely victims because of the socialist culture of the UK, where people are raised up to believe that government will protect them and the police will always be around to save them. Bad plan.

The UK is a nation filled with delusional sheeple, that much we can be certain of.

[MrJonno]

Better a sheep than a parasite on society.

[Seth]

So Seth you have a gas mask in case of a gas attack, suppose you have a nuclear bomb shelter in case of war as well!

Not at the moment, although I can create an adequate fallout shelter in my basement in a few hours...because I know how and what's required to do so. By the way, the masks are also P100 particulate filters, and thus are also useful against biological agents (weaponized smallpox, anthrax), radioactive particles from a "dirty bomb," and, with a model upgrade that's in the works, capable of using standard 40mm screw-on military-grade NBC filters that also filter nerve agents like Sarin. Combined with the protective outerwear I've owned for years as the result of being a fire department first responder, I'm pretty well prepared.

Total cost per person for an adequate set of personal protective gear ranges from $400 to $1000, depending on how sophisticated you want to get, and the cartridges have a shelf-life of at least 5 years. You can get filtration equipment that will work for anyone, including children and infants and even pets. From simple gas masks to powered air purifiers that can be installed in a sealed room in your house for shelter-in-place events, the technology is available and not all that expensive. There's a filtration mask made in the UK that's a clear plastic hood that will fit virtually anyone that's one of the best around. For urban residents in terrorist-target areas such basic protective/survival gear might mean the difference between staying alive long enough to evacuate and dying because one never bother to take precautions. That's called "normalcy bias," and it's going to kill millions one day.

One might look usefully at the Israelis for advice on preparedness for chemical and biological attacks. They are quite well prepared, as a nation, and they actually issue gas masks to their citizens.

More importantly, when it comes to a nuclear attack, I have an escape plan that puts me out of range of the highest-risk nuclear threat in my area, assuming it's not a MAD launch from Russia or China with no warning. In 30 minutes I can load up and be far enough into the mountains to avoid any direct blast or radiation effects, and in four hours I can be at my mountain refuge where I can sustain myself and my family indefinitely in the event of civil disorder or NBC attack.

Of course, being in close proximity to a surprise terrorist nuke event is non-survivable, but that just goes to show you that sometimes you die.

All part of common-sense education preparation and planning at minimal cost.

[Seth]

Better a sheep than a parasite on society.

Better yet to be a wolf...

[hadespussercats]

RE the 'mental illness' angle.
I am recurrently suicidally depressed. It never occurs to me during those times to go out and shoot someone. The only person in danger from one of my guns is me, and I haven't used one to do myself in yet. FYI taking away my guns won't prevent my suicide--should I eventually decide to go that route.

Scary really scary, I suppose you are allowed to drive as well?

What is it you fear?

I drive, I handle other people's money, I wield knives under certain situations, I have drugs in the house.....mine is a cornucopia of things for other people to be afraid of.

My wife has a serious mental illness and when she was going through a bad phase the first thing I did was take her car keys off her. Yeah I have a serious problem with suicidal people (or anyone with any mental illness) having access to any lethal weapons including cars. I could have just called up the appropiate government department and had her driving license cancelled (which they certainly would have done) but I didnt think that was neccesary.

She is now a lot better (but not cured) and driving but I wouldnt hesitate to do the same thing again

That's a rather sweeping approach to a very large gamut of possible ailments. Thirty percent of Americans deal with depression-- should none of them be allowed to drive? And what about people who have mental illnesses that are controlled or in remission? Don't they have civil rights?

There are plenty of people with mental illness who aren't violent and pose no danger to society. Attitudes like yours are the reason many of them are afraid to come out about their problems and seek treatment.

[Seth]

RE the 'mental illness' angle.
I am recurrently suicidally depressed. It never occurs to me during those times to go out and shoot someone. The only person in danger from one of my guns is me, and I haven't used one to do myself in yet. FYI taking away my guns won't prevent my suicide--should I eventually decide to go that route.

Scary really scary, I suppose you are allowed to drive as well?

What is it you fear?

I drive, I handle other people's money, I wield knives under certain situations, I have drugs in the house.....mine is a cornucopia of things for other people to be afraid of.

My wife has a serious mental illness and when she was going through a bad phase the first thing I did was take her car keys off her. Yeah I have a serious problem with suicidal people (or anyone with any mental illness) having access to any lethal weapons including cars. I could have just called up the appropiate government department and had her driving license cancelled (which they certainly would have done) but I didnt think that was neccesary.

She is now a lot better (but not cured) and driving but I wouldnt hesitate to do the same thing again

That's a rather sweeping approach to a very large gamut of possible ailments. Thirty percent of Americans deal with depression-- should none of them be allowed to drive? And what about people who have mental illnesses that are controlled or in remission? Don't they have civil rights?

There are plenty of people with mental illness who aren't violent and pose no danger to society. Attitudes like yours are the reason many of them are afraid to come out about their problems and seek treatment.

Absolutely correct! And can you guess which occupation contains perhaps the largest percentage of such hidden mental illness?

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

Police officers... all of whom carry guns 24/7.

[hadespussercats]

The idea that 2 men can't walk safeish after dark anywhere is just not part of British 'common sense'. Thats not to say you shouldnt be aware of local differences when you go abroad but not doing so means you have been foolish but does not mean you are a complete moron.

Firm believer that there is no such thing as common sense it implies common experiences and these are rarely universal

There's being able to walk after dark in well-populated, well-lit areas with plenty of the proverbial 'eyes-on-the-street-- it's another to brazenly stroll through an obviously decrepit neighborhood drunk, in the wee hours of the morning, oblivious to danger. I'm not saying it's not a shame that these sorts of things happen, but yes, I think poor common sense was a factor in what happened to these fellows.

What their nationality has to do with that, well, I couldn't say. I imagine someone's just taking the piss with the Brits-- possibly in retaliation to the OP taking the piss with Americans.

[Seth]

The idea that 2 men can't walk safeish after dark anywhere is just not part of British 'common sense'. Thats not to say you shouldnt be aware of local differences when you go abroad but not doing so means you have been foolish but does not mean you are a complete moron.

Firm believer that there is no such thing as common sense it implies common experiences and these are rarely universal

There's being able to walk after dark in well-populated, well-lit areas with plenty of the proverbial 'eyes-on-the-street-- it's another to brazenly stroll through an obviously decrepit neighborhood drunk, in the wee hours of the morning, oblivious to danger. I'm not saying it's not a shame that these sorts of things happen, but yes, I think poor common sense was a factor in what happened to these fellows.

What their nationality has to do with that, well, I couldn't say. I imagine someone's just taking the piss with the Brits-- possibly in retaliation to the OP taking the piss with Americans.

My guess is they were roaring drunk, wandered into the slum in search of some weed or blow, copped an attitude with the kid by dissing him, and got shot. It's fairly unusual even for gang-bangers to just execute white folks who wander onto their turf inadvertently for no reason at all. It brings too many police to the 'hood, because in Florida, the cops get very upset when tourists get killed...it's bad for business, and the gangbangers know it. They generally confine themselves to killing each other unless provoked. But I can see a pair of drunken, obnoxious, rowdy Brit soccer hooligans dissing a black kid in front of his peeps in his own hood thinking they could get away with it because the government will protect them and instead getting shot for their miscalculation.

[MrJonno]

That's a rather sweeping approach to a very large gamut of possible ailments. Thirty percent of Americans deal with depression-- should none of them be allowed to drive? And what about people who have mental illnesses that are controlled or in remission? Don't they have civil rights?

There are plenty of people with mental illness who aren't violent and pose no danger to society. Attitudes like yours are the reason many of them are afraid to come out about their problems and seek treatment.

Depends on the degree of mental illness (or any other illness) on whether they should be able to drive . Thats the current law in the UK driving is something you have to prove you are competent to do and are required to report any illness that may affect your ability to do so (The state/society determines if you are fit to drive not you). Wife was suffering from an extremely serious illness which required daily medical visits from nurses/shrinks etc and it would have been a complete irresponsibility by me as a human being never mind a husband to let her anywhere near a car.

No idea what the laws are like in the US but I would hope they would be similar, through I remember some TV program where a US driver had a heart attack and hit a policeman car causing him to have serious burns. The driver was criminally charge and convicted as he already knew he had a serious heart problem and another attack was likely. II support the principle but not sure what the point is in putting seriously ill people in jail).

If depression can be medically or otherwise controlled then I don't see a problem in them driving but thats a doctor/government/society decision not theirs

[Seth]

That's a rather sweeping approach to a very large gamut of possible ailments. Thirty percent of Americans deal with depression-- should none of them be allowed to drive? And what about people who have mental illnesses that are controlled or in remission? Don't they have civil rights?

There are plenty of people with mental illness who aren't violent and pose no danger to society. Attitudes like yours are the reason many of them are afraid to come out about their problems and seek treatment.

Depends on the degree of mental illness (or any other illness) on whether they should be able to drive . Thats the current law in the UK driving is something you have to prove you are competent to do and are required to report any illness that may affect your ability to do so (The state/society determines if you are fit to drive not you). Wife was suffering from an extremely serious illness which required daily medical visits from nurses/shrinks etc and it would have been a complete irresponsibility by me as a human being never mind a husband to let her anywhere near a car.

No idea what the laws are like in the US but I would hope they would be similar, through I remember some TV program where a US driver had a heart attack and hit a policeman car causing him to have serious burns. The driver was criminally charge and convicted as he already knew he had a serious heart problem and another attack was likely. II support the principle but not sure what the point is in putting seriously ill people in jail).

If depression can be medically or otherwise controlled then I don't see a problem in them driving but thats a doctor/government/society decision not theirs

The same is true here. You aren't allowed to drive unless you are medically fit to drive. However, simple depression is not a severe enough malady to justify barring someone from driving unless they are suicidal. And if they are suicidal, their doctor is supposed to report them to the DMV, not to mention committing them for a mental evaluation.

However, we don't require a physical before you get your license (as they do for pilot's licenses) nor do you have to "report" to anyone, you just have to refrain from driving if you're not fit to drive, for whatever reason, and you're held legally liable if you drive while physically unfit to the extent that it endangers others.

[MrJonno]

There's being able to walk after dark in well-populated, well-lit areas with plenty of the proverbial 'eyes-on-the-street-- it's another to brazenly stroll through an obviously decrepit neighborhood drunk, in the wee hours of the morning, oblivious to danger. I'm not saying it's not a shame that these sorts of things happen, but yes, I think poor common sense was a factor in what happened to these fellows.

For a single women or possible a single man there are areas in the UK I probably wouldnt risk it, but 2 fit young men get real that just wouldnt be in their experience. There simply isnt anywhere that dangerous. A mugger isnt going to risk it even with a knife on 2 people so you are going to have to run into an entire gang out for trouble which could happen but is very very unlikely. More likely to trip over the pavement and break your neck