Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bauglir]

But barring a lot of women from patrol duty just because they lack the muscle strength is also wrong

Why?

To be clear, what I'm advocating is barring people from patrol duty because they lack the muscle strength, not only women. For pretty much the same reasons you don't let people work in biosafety hoods without training.

[Truean]

"Tough on Crime?"
So, "their plan was to buy $50 worth of groceries and not pay for two $2.50 sandwiches?" I'm not buying it. Alone and lost in new city/state with pregnant wife and 3 year old daughter.... Simply they were stupid and forgot to pay. Arresting them and taking their kid away for 18 hours is a bit much. They offered to pay the $5, but naturally the store wasn't listening, because "it's store policy not to accept payment for something that left the store." This was said in the store manager's office, inside the store. Simple logic, the sandwiches were inside them, and they were inside the store having never left. How exactly had the sandwiches left the store?

Perhaps it was stupid to eat the sandwiches inside the store, and also to forget about them at the register, but I can see that happening with a scared three year old in a new city/state.... The article comments are lovely, and none of them seem to give a shit that poor kid was thrown into this for no real reason.... I love the priorities, protect every cent of the corporate profit at all costs! $2.50 sandwich in controversy they're offering to pay for? To the jails!

Let's see, pregnant woman hungry, three year old in new city/state scared, overwhelmed, lost parents make simple mistake they immediately offer to fix.... Clearly, they must be master thieves and lying.... I'd burn safeway alive, screaming and begging me to stop in front of a jury for IIED among other things.... No settlement, PR nightmare....

From experience, whenever anyone else is in trouble, we demand they be stoned to death. When we're in trouble, we say the law should show mercy.... Pick one, pick wisely. Know that it could be you; yes it could....

"That only happens to 'other people....' I'm super awesomes so never never me...." ~ Everyone, as the universe and laws of probability ignore them....

[ChairmanPoo]

I think there are women who can fulfill those roles. I know of at least one woman who's physically stronger than me by a fair bit. And I'm not a small guy by anyone's measure, mind you.

[Jackrabbit]

The solution to weaker upper body strength is giving all female soldiers a powered exoskeleton (aka power armor). Economic? No. Awesome? Yes!

1. Lower the strength entry standards for women.
2. Outfit all military women with Samus-type power suits.
3.
4. World peace!

And what happens when Other M syndrome hits? That'll put gender equality back about 600 years.

[ChairmanPoo]

What's that?

[micelus]

He's referencing the metroid game where Samus gets treated differently than usual. As in, gender inequality different. At least, I think.

[RedKing]

No.  If she can't at least drag her fellow soldier (hell, even I could probably do this easily with a little training, and "physically strong" is not a moniker I would ever attach to myself), she doesn't get to be a soldier.  End of story.

Lowering barriers to entry is one thing.  Lowering the standard of the entire profession is another.

I'd agree except that the Army has lowered its standards on EVERYTHING else. Why should they maintain the glass ceiling on women at the same time they're letting butterballs and gangbangers in? Maybe the female medics would be able to haul their comrades if Corporal McFlabberstein did a little more PT.

To me, this is one of the biggest arguments in favor of reinstating the draft. When we've hit the point where the all-volunteer force has to be *less* selective than the draft force was in WWII or Korea or Vietnam, there's a problem.

[Nadaka]

No.  If she can't at least drag her fellow soldier (hell, even I could probably do this easily with a little training, and "physically strong" is not a moniker I would ever attach to myself), she doesn't get to be a soldier.  End of story.

Lowering barriers to entry is one thing.  Lowering the standard of the entire profession is another.

I'd agree except that the Army has lowered its standards on EVERYTHING else. Why should they maintain the glass ceiling on women at the same time they're letting butterballs and gangbangers in? Maybe the female medics would be able to haul their comrades if Corporal McFlabberstein did a little more PT.

To me, this is one of the biggest arguments in favor of reinstating the draft. When we've hit the point where the all-volunteer force has to be *less* selective than the draft force was in WWII or Korea or Vietnam, there's a problem.

Not really. They have far more volunteers than they have positions for, even with 2 wars going. They are not even accepting qualified recruits, instead deferring them to the national guard instead.

[RedKing]

No.  If she can't at least drag her fellow soldier (hell, even I could probably do this easily with a little training, and "physically strong" is not a moniker I would ever attach to myself), she doesn't get to be a soldier.  End of story.

Lowering barriers to entry is one thing.  Lowering the standard of the entire profession is another.

I'd agree except that the Army has lowered its standards on EVERYTHING else. Why should they maintain the glass ceiling on women at the same time they're letting butterballs and gangbangers in? Maybe the female medics would be able to haul their comrades if Corporal McFlabberstein did a little more PT.

To me, this is one of the biggest arguments in favor of reinstating the draft. When we've hit the point where the all-volunteer force has to be *less* selective than the draft force was in WWII or Korea or Vietnam, there's a problem.

Not really. They have far more volunteers than they have positions for, even with 2 wars going. They are not even accepting qualified recruits, instead deferring them to the national guard instead.

Source? Because that's a major sea-change from the situation as it was just a few years ago.

[Nadaka]

Not really. They have far more volunteers than they have positions for, even with 2 wars going. They are not even accepting qualified recruits, instead deferring them to the national guard instead.

Source? Because that's a major sea-change from the situation as it was just a few years ago.

Source? A US Army recruiter who is a friend of mine. Just a few years ago, getting shot at in a land virtually devoid of alcohol and eligible women didn't
compare as favorably to US domestic job prospects as it does now.


I probably shouldn't say they are not accepting recruits, but they have been instructed to tell the majority of applicants that the only positions available are national guard.

[RedKing]

Huh. Yeah, I just checked the stats over at Recruitment Command's website, and it looks like you're right. The worst of it was 2005-2008, and they've actually started making targets again. (In part, because they've lowered the branch target by 15,000....)

Which is odd, because I could swear some of the relaxing of PT and criminal history standards came after that. But no, it looks like that was mostly in 2006-07 that the damage was done. No word on whether the restrictions have been re-tightened or not since then.

[Heron TSG]

Granted, there is still a huge deficit of qualified electrical/mechanical engineer volunteers in the Army, Air Force, and Navy.

[Phmcw]

I'm with not lowering the standard, but it's definitely not a gender problem : women or not women, hit the bench and you'll end up fit for hiring.

On another topic, Israel dropped the mask once again : they are speeding up colonisation in response to Palestinian membership of the UNESCO, and US is taking part in the reprisal by lowering it's contribution to the agency.
That's going to be wonderful PR : the Palestinians struggle legally and that's US (and Israel but at this point those who didn't see this coming are fools) response?

[Aqizzar]

Yeah, who didn't see that coming?  US pulling money out of UNESCO, that's pretty harsh.  Surely, there will be many forthright statements about this activity from the President and Secretary of State.  Surely.


I'm sure some of you have already seen it by now, but there's a story going around about a firearm instructor in a little Texas town who refuses to instruct Muslims, "socialists", or anyone who voted for Obama.

If you are a socialist liberal and/or voted for the current campaigner-in-chief, please do not take this class.  You’ve already proven that you cannot make a knowledgeable and prudent decision as required under the law.  Also, if you are a non-Christian Arab or Muslim, I will not teach you this class.  Once again, with no shame, I am Crockett Keller.

I won't bother linking to the YouTube clip, you can find it yourself.  The important thing is that the Texas Department of Public Safety is likely to revoke his instruction license, since following through on such a statement (or clearly intending to) does violate the terms, obviously.  Just kinda funny.

[Duke 2.0]

 Does that term mean he won't teach Muslims and Atheists? Or Christian Arabs? Guy needs to word his bigotry better. There are too many edge cases and cracks to fall through.