it was my proactive reaction to what was inevitable. And it was mentioned a few responses ago.
Like I said agree to disagree and focus on why these individuals feel the need to murder. Or is that not acceptable because it doesn't follow a political agenda?
Maybe I missed it in this thread, but I haven't seen anyone calling for this ban you are arguing against.
So is that snyde remark another "proactive" reaction? :roll:
To be honest, I don't have the slightest idea what political agenda you're referring to. What reason would anyone have for wanting to regulate guns other than for reducing their harmful effects?
So then what's being done to "focus on why these individuals feel the need to murder" (and then intervene) and how effective is that intervention? And what about those who don't necessarily feel the need to murder in a premeditated way?
I'm trying to deal with reality on the topic, I doubt many kids will do that. However I'd support the use of a gun, or any other device whether designed for killing or not, to be used to stop that person.
Would you?
Should we fight wars? Or should we just allow those that wish to kill as many Americans as possible the path to do so because we don't want to use a gun to stop them?
I'll say it again, probably for the fifth time, we need to find out why kids feel the need to kill other kids. Period.
If neither the device, nor its destructive power, have anything to do with it, do you support nuclear weapons in the hands of school kids (or any other random person)?
I'll share my perspective with you about this argument: To me, it's typically the conservative, NRA member, gun owner types (if we have to stereotype) who have the knee-jerk reactions. Someone can start a thread saying "a hand gun landed in the hands of the wrong person" or someone can acknowledge that gun violence/death is a problem, and the people I know who fit this stereotype immediately start going off about how bans aren't the answer (even if no one is calling for a ban) and "you can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands" and blah blah blah. This defensiveness doesn't solve anything and makes it hard to take those people seriously or to make any progress toward solving the problem. I have yet to hear a solution to the problem, with everyone being so busy worrying that acknowledging that there is a problem will immediately strip them of their rights and get them kicked out of the NRA.
You didn't answer my question, or my other question awhile back.
You obviously have not read my entire replies where I have been asking how we find out what makes kids kill other kids. What goes through their head that a life, make that two since one is dead and the other in prison, is of no value?
Perhaps it's the normalization of violence through the media and the prevalence of gun use.
So what do you propose to reduce the amount of guns?
it starts with people stopping saying that guns don't kill people when they most clearly and most certainly do. it is that mentality that not only dismisses the issue, it basically ignores the issue.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Let's fix the real issue of how any weapon got into school, and what goes through someones mind to do such a thing. Blaming a device is irresponsible.
Nobody's blaming the gun. No one is saying that the gun grew feet and hands and fired itself at a school child. Your fucked-up laws allowed the gun to get into the hands of a child, just as there are thousands of other children in America walking around with guns, or who have easy access to a gun. If you can't see how that's a problem then maybe one day you will when it's you or someone close to you who gets shot in the face by a 12 year old.
I still think we need to go inside the head of the person. Something larger is being ignored.
I think we need to go inside the heads of people who support the carrying of guns by anyone and everyone. Something larger is being ignored - like a nation obsessed with fear, and violence, and penis size.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
The City of Chicago has a handgun ban in place since the mid-80's yet either last year or the year before it had the highest total in the nation for murders, and IIRC the highest amount in city history. I only have limited Internet access right now so I can't find exact numbers.
So my "fucked up laws" have not prevented dozens of school kids from being murdered, even though guns are banned in the city.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
The City of Chicago has a handgun ban in place since the mid-80's yet either last year or the year before it had the highest total in the nation for murders, and IIRC the highest amount in city history. I only have limited Internet access right now so I can't find exact numbers.
So my "fucked up laws" have not prevented dozens of school kids from being murdered, even though guns are banned in the city.
Do you think this is in part because surrounding areas have less strict regulations? Why do you think it is that other countries, with much stricter regulations, have such lower rates of gun death than the U.S.?
By the way, back to your comment about people owning guns for self-defense.... I just remembered that I read a study a few months ago about how people who own guns are more likely to be shot than people who don't own guns. I could try to find that for you if you're interested.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
I don't believe that it is because of lesser regulations as the city of Oak Park is another that has a hand gun ban in place. Chicago has a very high gang population as do many of the surrounding cities, and I think that has almost all to do with it.
Look at this country and see where murders are the highest, in big cities. These big cities have high gang populations as well. Compare LA to the entire state of Texas, or Montana, or Utah. I'm sure Dallas and Houston have issues but does Salt Lake, or the entire state of Montana? I'm using these as an example.
Now I believe this boils down to race. And not because of any inherant gene or anything. I think inner city kids don't have a way out, and it isn't really their faults. Education is poor and underserved, and population density is crazy. I think a way needs to be found to show them that murder is not the answer. Unfortunately it is a serious challenge to do that.
To answer your other question (and I guess I missed some previous but I'm on my phone and it is a bit harder) I'll take my chances. Maybe not everyone can but I've shot thousands of rounds at the range to build experience plus I have some modest defense training. So I feel my abilities are quite better than average.
Owning a gun is a serious responsibility that not everyone is cut out for or wants to do. No biggie. But an owner should be trained in some courses to limit mistakes.
In June the Supreme Court will likely declare Chicago's ban unconstitutional, but the only thing that will have really changed is law abiding citizens will be able to posess them.
After all the bad guys already have them.
0
unsung
I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
Oh and as far as other countries having less gun crimes, please site examples for conversation sake. I'm sure most do but comparing populations should be noted as well.
I don't believe that it is because of lesser regulations as the city of Oak Park is another that has a hand gun ban in place. Chicago has a very high gang population as do many of the surrounding cities, and I think that has almost all to do with it.
Look at this country and see where murders are the highest, in big cities. These big cities have high gang populations as well. Compare LA to the entire state of Texas, or Montana, or Utah. I'm sure Dallas and Houston have issues but does Salt Lake, or the entire state of Montana? I'm using these as an example.
Now I believe this boils down to race. And not because of any inherant gene or anything. I think inner city kids don't have a way out, and it isn't really their faults. Education is poor and underserved, and population density is crazy. I think a way needs to be found to show them that murder is not the answer. Unfortunately it is a serious challenge to do that.
To answer your other question (and I guess I missed some previous but I'm on my phone and it is a bit harder) I'll take my chances. Maybe not everyone can but I've shot thousands of rounds at the range to build experience plus I have some modest defense training. So I feel my abilities are quite better than average.
Owning a gun is a serious responsibility that not everyone is cut out for or wants to do. No biggie. But an owner should be trained in some courses to limit mistakes.
In June the Supreme Court will likely declare Chicago's ban unconstitutional, but the only thing that will have really changed is law abiding citizens will be able to posess them.
After all the bad guys already have them.
Again, I don't think you answered my questions.
But here are some more:
1. Are you saying that restricting access to guns doesn't reduce gun-related violence or that we're just not successful at restricting access to guns?
2. If it's the former, that gets back to my other question about why gun-related violence is decreased in other countries with restricted access to guns. I don't have those stats, by the way. I've read them in this forum in the past though and remember that they were quite compelling. I think maybe Dunk posted them.
3. If it's the latter, how are other countries successful and restricting access to guns and why can't we do whatever they're doing?
4. Also, how do you feel about harm reduction interventions? For instance, needle exchange programs acknowledge that we're never going to get people to stop using IV drugs, so their purpose is to get the dirty needles (which are more harmful) off the streets. Such programs have proven very effective at improving public health outcomes, which I think is everyone's goal here. So yes, in theory we should make everyone stop wanting to kill each other. But since we're not going to be 100% successful at that, shouldn't we also take other measures, like reducing the number of guns on the streets, to reduce the harm?
5. Do you support any kind of gun regulation? Or do you think anyone should be able to own and carry a gun any time?
By the way, re: your comment about your superior shooting skills... that's what they all say.
The City of Chicago has a handgun ban in place since the mid-80's yet either last year or the year before it had the highest total in the nation for murders, and IIRC the highest amount in city history. I only have limited Internet access right now so I can't find exact numbers.
So my "fucked up laws" have not prevented dozens of school kids from being murdered, even though guns are banned in the city.
Like scb said, if you can buy guns outside the city, or even across the state line, then guns will still be available to those who want them. Most other countries have a nationwide ban and/or very strict licensing laws. Big difference.
Look at this country and see where murders are the highest, in big cities. These big cities have high gang populations as well. Compare LA to the entire state of Texas, or Montana, or Utah. I'm sure Dallas and Houston have issues but does Salt Lake, or the entire state of Montana? I'm using these as an example.
Now I believe this boils down to race. And not because of any inherant gene or anything. I think inner city kids don't have a way out, and it isn't really their faults. Education is poor and underserved, and population density is crazy. I think a way needs to be found to show them that murder is not the answer. Unfortunately it is a serious challenge to do that.
England has it's share of gangs and violence too, except these kids aren't able to get hold of guns - excluding a very few incidents. Therefore their weapon of choice is the knife - lot's of stabbings in England over the past few years, especially in London. Thank God that guns are not available in England because if they were then it's pretty damn certain that there would have been a ton more murders.
No one's saying that a total ban on guns will completely eradicate murder, and death in general in the world, but it will certainly reduce the amount of random killings taking place. Columbine and Virginia tech could not have occurred without guns. You cannot massacre 30 or 40 people with a knife.
To answer your other question (and I guess I missed some previous but I'm on my phone and it is a bit harder) I'll take my chances. Maybe not everyone can but I've shot thousands of rounds at the range to build experience plus I have some modest defense training. So I feel my abilities are quite better than average.
Owning a gun is a serious responsibility that not everyone is cut out for or wants to do. No biggie. But an owner should be trained in some courses to limit mistakes.
In June the Supreme Court will likely declare Chicago's ban unconstitutional, but the only thing that will have really changed is law abiding citizens will be able to posess them.
After all the bad guys already have them.
I have no problem with responsible gun enthusiasts owning guns. I've fired a few myself - 44 Magnum, M16, Lee Enfield rifle e.t.c. But these things should be kept off the streets. Period.
I haven't read this whole thread in its entirety but the whole "you can't blame the device" argument is very illogical. That's like saying, on a more magnanimous level, that you can't blame the massacre of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki on nuclear weapons - only the people who fired them. Yeah, the people who fire the weapons are obviously at fault, but no one is saying they're innocent. But when there is a device that makes killing people easier and its readily available for use by almost anyone, it's a fucking problem. I mean no offense, really, but how is this not fucking obvious to anyone? Guns make killing people easier. A bat, a knife, any other type of weapon, would make things a little less difficult. And how the hell were cigarettes and alcohol and fast food and mosquitos brought into this discussion? This discussion is about weapons, not about anything that can cause someone's heart to stop beating. Alright, I gotta stop wasting time and finish writing my paper.
Well they do say violence in schools have escalated since
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
I understand that guns in the hands of wrong people is passionate for many. My point in posting was not that guns are bad but that guns + disaffected youth + school property = bad news. The thought of going to school and getting shot in the back of the head (as was this case) because you piss someone off is just WRONG.
Well they do say violence in schools have escalated since
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
So, if mandatory prayer is reinstated, and the ten commandments are displayed prominently all over schools, violence wil decrease?
I think we need to bring up the old "correlation does not equal causation" card, along with mentioning the concept of "third variables". In plain english, is really prayer all that is different between american society ca 1962 and american society 2010?
Peace
Dan
"YOU [humans] NEED TO BELIEVE IN THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE. HOW ELSE CAN THEY BECOME?" - Death
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Well they do say violence in schools have escalated since
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
Secondly, why does religion = morality? I think the 9/11 hijackers were pretty damn religious, yet I don't think they were very moral. Just my opinion though.
Thirdly, the march on Washington happened in 1963, the year after the prayer was removed by the Supreme court. Could these connect? I highly doubt it, however, it IS a connection, very similar to the one you made.
Believe me, when I was growin up, I thought the worst thing you could turn out to be was normal, So I say freaks in the most complementary way. Here's a song by a fellow freak - E.V
I don't believe that it is because of lesser regulations as the city of Oak Park is another that has a hand gun ban in place. Chicago has a very high gang population as do many of the surrounding cities, and I think that has almost all to do with it.
Look at this country and see where murders are the highest, in big cities. These big cities have high gang populations as well. Compare LA to the entire state of Texas, or Montana, or Utah. I'm sure Dallas and Houston have issues but does Salt Lake, or the entire state of Montana? I'm using these as an example.
Now I believe this boils down to race. And not because of any inherant gene or anything. I think inner city kids don't have a way out, and it isn't really their faults. Education is poor and underserved, and population density is crazy. I think a way needs to be found to show them that murder is not the answer. Unfortunately it is a serious challenge to do that.
To answer your other question (and I guess I missed some previous but I'm on my phone and it is a bit harder) I'll take my chances. Maybe not everyone can but I've shot thousands of rounds at the range to build experience plus I have some modest defense training. So I feel my abilities are quite better than average.
Owning a gun is a serious responsibility that not everyone is cut out for or wants to do. No biggie. But an owner should be trained in some courses to limit mistakes.
In June the Supreme Court will likely declare Chicago's ban unconstitutional, but the only thing that will have really changed is law abiding citizens will be able to posess them.
After all the bad guys already have them.
what does race have to do with it when it is usually the white kids that go into schools and start shooting people??
if you are not willing to concede the point that the gun is responsible for the death then it is pointless to continue discussing this with you. i think you should admit that instead of reaching and saying that you can murder someone with a cigarette...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Well they do say violence in schools have escalated since
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
Religion scares me as much as gun-wielding lunatics do.
Well they do say violence in schools have escalated since
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
So, if mandatory prayer is reinstated, and the ten commandments are displayed prominently all over schools, violence wil decrease?
I think we need to bring up the old "correlation does not equal causation" card, along with mentioning the concept of "third variables". In plain english, is really prayer all that is different between american society ca 1962 and american society 2010?
Peace
Dan
No one said mandatory prayer...but do we have to have courts ruling on God?...don’t you think the kids see this.....what’s wrong with the Ten Commandments?....I think most of civil society can agree it is just the basics for a good life.....just because it comes from a religious book does that automatically make it a bad thing no matter what it says?......
Another difference in society now compared to then is all the freakin peace, love and happiness hippies turned into GREEDY business men (women) and politician. Working longer hours because enough is never enough for them . . . as they leave their kids to others to care for.....then on the other side because of their greed we have parents having to work two to three jobs because they cannot make a living wage.......under both of these instances the kids get left without the attention they need. Then you have families that do not bound. I have heard a lot of Grandparents say “I raised mine now you raise yours” or “I’m not a babysitter...I deserve to live my life”. Well parenting does not stop when your child turns 18....Kids need there Grandparents in there life....Remember when age meant wisdom? Then there used to be morale standards for TV shows but now anything goes...so the kids feel the same more than likely...
“We the people are the rightful masters of bothCongress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.” Abraham Lincoln
how in the world did a thread about someone getting murdered at a school morph into a discussion about prayer in school and the need for grandparents to be involved in a kid's life? can we PLEASE try to stay on topic here??
does anyone have a link about this story? i would like to read up on it because i am curious about the facts in this case, not people's hypotheses on why bothering god via prayer in school could have prevented it, or that the bullet was in some way not responsible for anything....seeing a sign with the ten commandments is not going to make people pause and think about their actions, its just like how every quarter mile there is a speed limit sign on the highway, people see them and just ignore them and do whatever speed they want to do anyway...
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
Comments
So is that snyde remark another "proactive" reaction? :roll:
To be honest, I don't have the slightest idea what political agenda you're referring to. What reason would anyone have for wanting to regulate guns other than for reducing their harmful effects?
So then what's being done to "focus on why these individuals feel the need to murder" (and then intervene) and how effective is that intervention? And what about those who don't necessarily feel the need to murder in a premeditated way?
You didn't answer my question, or my other question awhile back.
Perhaps it's the normalization of violence through the media and the prevalence of gun use.
I do believe that's just mathematically (and historically) correct.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
No they wouldn't.
And you base this assumption on what exactly?
The murderer was blamed. Murderers who murder using guns are charged with murder with a firearm.
You can defend yourself against a knife or a bat. You can't stop a bullet.
If you think it's o.k for kids to have guns then there's something wrong with your brain.
Nobody's blaming the gun. No one is saying that the gun grew feet and hands and fired itself at a school child. Your fucked-up laws allowed the gun to get into the hands of a child, just as there are thousands of other children in America walking around with guns, or who have easy access to a gun. If you can't see how that's a problem then maybe one day you will when it's you or someone close to you who gets shot in the face by a 12 year old.
I think we need to go inside the heads of people who support the carrying of guns by anyone and everyone. Something larger is being ignored - like a nation obsessed with fear, and violence, and penis size.
The City of Chicago has a handgun ban in place since the mid-80's yet either last year or the year before it had the highest total in the nation for murders, and IIRC the highest amount in city history. I only have limited Internet access right now so I can't find exact numbers.
So my "fucked up laws" have not prevented dozens of school kids from being murdered, even though guns are banned in the city.
Seriously don't be a complete idiot, nobody here suggests that. Ease up on the drama.
Do you think this is in part because surrounding areas have less strict regulations? Why do you think it is that other countries, with much stricter regulations, have such lower rates of gun death than the U.S.?
By the way, back to your comment about people owning guns for self-defense.... I just remembered that I read a study a few months ago about how people who own guns are more likely to be shot than people who don't own guns. I could try to find that for you if you're interested.
Look at this country and see where murders are the highest, in big cities. These big cities have high gang populations as well. Compare LA to the entire state of Texas, or Montana, or Utah. I'm sure Dallas and Houston have issues but does Salt Lake, or the entire state of Montana? I'm using these as an example.
Now I believe this boils down to race. And not because of any inherant gene or anything. I think inner city kids don't have a way out, and it isn't really their faults. Education is poor and underserved, and population density is crazy. I think a way needs to be found to show them that murder is not the answer. Unfortunately it is a serious challenge to do that.
To answer your other question (and I guess I missed some previous but I'm on my phone and it is a bit harder) I'll take my chances. Maybe not everyone can but I've shot thousands of rounds at the range to build experience plus I have some modest defense training. So I feel my abilities are quite better than average.
Owning a gun is a serious responsibility that not everyone is cut out for or wants to do. No biggie. But an owner should be trained in some courses to limit mistakes.
In June the Supreme Court will likely declare Chicago's ban unconstitutional, but the only thing that will have really changed is law abiding citizens will be able to posess them.
After all the bad guys already have them.
Again, I don't think you answered my questions.
But here are some more:
1. Are you saying that restricting access to guns doesn't reduce gun-related violence or that we're just not successful at restricting access to guns?
2. If it's the former, that gets back to my other question about why gun-related violence is decreased in other countries with restricted access to guns. I don't have those stats, by the way. I've read them in this forum in the past though and remember that they were quite compelling. I think maybe Dunk posted them.
3. If it's the latter, how are other countries successful and restricting access to guns and why can't we do whatever they're doing?
4. Also, how do you feel about harm reduction interventions? For instance, needle exchange programs acknowledge that we're never going to get people to stop using IV drugs, so their purpose is to get the dirty needles (which are more harmful) off the streets. Such programs have proven very effective at improving public health outcomes, which I think is everyone's goal here. So yes, in theory we should make everyone stop wanting to kill each other. But since we're not going to be 100% successful at that, shouldn't we also take other measures, like reducing the number of guns on the streets, to reduce the harm?
5. Do you support any kind of gun regulation? Or do you think anyone should be able to own and carry a gun any time?
By the way, re: your comment about your superior shooting skills... that's what they all say.
Like scb said, if you can buy guns outside the city, or even across the state line, then guns will still be available to those who want them. Most other countries have a nationwide ban and/or very strict licensing laws. Big difference.
England has it's share of gangs and violence too, except these kids aren't able to get hold of guns - excluding a very few incidents. Therefore their weapon of choice is the knife - lot's of stabbings in England over the past few years, especially in London. Thank God that guns are not available in England because if they were then it's pretty damn certain that there would have been a ton more murders.
No one's saying that a total ban on guns will completely eradicate murder, and death in general in the world, but it will certainly reduce the amount of random killings taking place. Columbine and Virginia tech could not have occurred without guns. You cannot massacre 30 or 40 people with a knife.
I have no problem with responsible gun enthusiasts owning guns. I've fired a few myself - 44 Magnum, M16, Lee Enfield rifle e.t.c. But these things should be kept off the streets. Period.
1962, when prayer was removed by the Supreme Court, something happened to America's soul and
America's schools. Just look at at the decline in moral standards and values.
What’s so wrong with the Ten Commandments hanging around?
So, if mandatory prayer is reinstated, and the ten commandments are displayed prominently all over schools, violence wil decrease?
I think we need to bring up the old "correlation does not equal causation" card, along with mentioning the concept of "third variables". In plain english, is really prayer all that is different between american society ca 1962 and american society 2010?
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pkRYaMiP ... L&index=15
Secondly, why does religion = morality? I think the 9/11 hijackers were pretty damn religious, yet I don't think they were very moral. Just my opinion though.
Thirdly, the march on Washington happened in 1963, the year after the prayer was removed by the Supreme court. Could these connect? I highly doubt it, however, it IS a connection, very similar to the one you made.
A moral responsibility to spread our religion, democracy, or whatever other ideology you subscribe to.
Hell, without this thing called "morality" we all might go stark staring sane.
if you are not willing to concede the point that the gun is responsible for the death then it is pointless to continue discussing this with you. i think you should admit that instead of reaching and saying that you can murder someone with a cigarette...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Religion scares me as much as gun-wielding lunatics do.
Another difference in society now compared to then is all the freakin peace, love and happiness hippies turned into GREEDY business men (women) and politician. Working longer hours because enough is never enough for them . . . as they leave their kids to others to care for.....then on the other side because of their greed we have parents having to work two to three jobs because they cannot make a living wage.......under both of these instances the kids get left without the attention they need. Then you have families that do not bound. I have heard a lot of Grandparents say “I raised mine now you raise yours” or “I’m not a babysitter...I deserve to live my life”. Well parenting does not stop when your child turns 18....Kids need there Grandparents in there life....Remember when age meant wisdom? Then there used to be morale standards for TV shows but now anything goes...so the kids feel the same more than likely...
does anyone have a link about this story? i would like to read up on it because i am curious about the facts in this case, not people's hypotheses on why bothering god via prayer in school could have prevented it, or that the bullet was in some way not responsible for anything....seeing a sign with the ten commandments is not going to make people pause and think about their actions, its just like how every quarter mile there is a speed limit sign on the highway, people see them and just ignore them and do whatever speed they want to do anyway...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."