Published
I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
https://apnews.com/article/new-jersey-newark-bomb-threats-d0a59b80d460f9354f6bfe86f65475c6
QuoteAccording to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
toomuchbaloney said:
She's says as she quotes a comment as a response.
This is a current events thread, why not being those more worthy news items to the discussion?
You can discuss all you wish. I've notice not much regarding this current event? Didn't catch anyone's attention in the world today? Seems a little quite. I wonder why that is?
NRSKarenRN said:Since 2019, heavy news coverage re rape kit testing backlog and reasons for it ---with improvement noted in news reports afterward. Many report not processed due to FUNDING.
ABC News 2019:
North Carolina has between 14,000 and 15,000 untested rape kits
Billfold 2016:
The Cost of Things: Testing a Rape Kit
Kaiser Family Foundation 2022
Out-of-Pocket Charges for Rape Kits and Services for Sexual Assault Survivors
Overview of Federal and State Programs to Support Victims of Sexual Violence
Thank for the information. It clarifies that police are not doing rape kits because "they are too expensive.". Like it comes right out of their own pockets.
There's a lack of funding. Not mean police that are soft on "rape culture".
Roitrn said:You can discuss all you wish. I've notice not much regarding this current event? Didn't catch anyone's attention in the world today? Seems a little quite. I wonder why that is?
I do not live on this application. I also underwent a 3 hour procedure that was 90 miles away, had to endure a 3 hour recovery and then drive home.
Roitrn said:You can discuss all you wish. I've notice not much regarding this current event? Didn't catch anyone's attention in the world today? Seems a little quite. I wonder why that is?
What are you yammering about? Did you bring another topic to the thread or are you just complaining?
I loved that you chastised me for using and citing the police excuse about rape kit funding ... then thanked another member for giving you MORE citations talking about funding and backlogs of rape kits... just before you say definitively that "there's a lack of funding".
It's a good day when we learn something new. Apology accepted.
toomuchbaloney said:I hope you are feeling OK at this point and that it's all smooth roads from here.
Thank you for your good wishes. Hopefully I will have an improvement in QOL, but this morning I feel like I've been pulled through a knothole. I broke down and took one of 3 hoarded IR oxycodones because I was still awake at 5 am with chest aching. You can look at the daily diary if you want the gory details, LOL.
toomuchbaloney said:What are you yammering about? Did you bring another topic to the thread or are you just complaining?
I loved that you chastised me for using and citing the police excuse about rape kit funding ... then thanked another member for giving you MORE citations talking about funding and backlogs of rape kits... just before you say definitively that "there's a lack of funding".
It's a good day when we learn something new. Apology accepted.
Guess the algorithm needs work.
Roitrn said:I'm not sure. Baloney introduced the "person in a costume" description.
This isn't about laws or what intimate spaces people shpuud use. My intent is to discuss what can be done to make everyone feel comfortable and safe.
Your chicken egg comment suggest you are not interested in a discussion.
Do you haveca suggestion? If not, feel free to sanctimoniously assert your virtue now. I will not respond to post not focused on solutions.
Who cares if you don't respond. It's a group discussion and I'm going to keep being a part of it, me and my sanctimonious views.
Throw shade all you want, or let's see, act like you don't understand when certain people post and speak. I see you
toomuchbaloney said:She also can't provide any body of evidence that demonstrates her concern playing out in reality. She tried. All that can be presented is a few complaints across the entire continent (two countries) over 10 years. Complaints that are easily addressed with current laws.
Right but wants to end the discussion when she wants to, or get defensive and try to dismiss people from the discussion.
Roitrn said:Thank you. That was much more positive and constructive than other replies.
I do not want trans-women to have to feel uncomfortable or not safe in any way. I'm not saying they have to use what's reflective of what was or is between their legs.
I agree. They were born a man or possibly intersex and now identify as a woman. I can easily understand this. I have encountered some who cannot aknowl3dge that this person identifies as something other than what was presented at birth. (Not saying mind body cannot be mismatched).
Law should prevent people from many things, it simply does not.
How do we know who's the criminal and who's the genuine trans-person? Especially because it's expected that we acknowledge this at the moment the person says they are. Also, you are not permitted to question this either.
So what's your idea of a solution? I think gender neutral intimate areas. Not perfect but nothing is perfect.
ha ha! I don't need your thanks.
How do you know when anyone's a criminal until they act? You don't.
You are not Tom Cruise from Minority Report. You can't go around assuming what a person would do and then punish them preemptively off of an assumption. You can't look at a person and discriminate against them based off of your limited knowledge because of what you think you know. And why do you want to question a person to ask them if they are really trans or pretending to be? that's weird.
toomuchbaloney
16,246 Posts
Thank you.