A man tries to cut you in a drive thru line. What do you do?

[Stadler]

I mean....

*points at the thread*

I didn't even reference any actual data, and you jumped my ass.

Only because you were pissing me off.   

I'm kidding.   

[Stadler]

Stats aren't everything, though. Stats are important, they help us "examine the evidence" and ground ourselves. But at the same time, SwedishGoose and Zantera get to live in countries where they can go to the movies or a mall without the thought entering their minds that there might be some kind of shooting or attack. These days are behind me, as an American. I can not go to a movie theater, or the mall, or a parade, without thinking about the possibility of a shooting or some other kind of mass casualty event. I can't send my kid to school without the thought of a shooting in the back of my mind. So in that sense, I don't think they're wrong at all, if those two posters were Americans, there's a decent chance they'd be thinking about things just like how I am.

"The Stats" are important, but not in a way that convinces me that "everything is fine", but more in a way that reminds me that, even though everything's not fine, chances are slim that I'll be impacted. Whether the "perception" is "reality" is besides the point - the perception itself is a real thing, and one of the unique characteristics of the American experience at this point.

But it's important to do as you've done, and separate the two.  Look, you're not talking to a stone; I was at dinner last Tuesday in New York, sitting at a table on the street and a fight broke out at the Irish bar next door (no, not making that up).   We all looked at each other, and watched the events very carefully; at one point the aggressor walked down the center of the street away from the bar (but past us) and every one of us watched carefully.  I for one was prepared - at least in theory - if the event escalated to either guns or something else (I was also worried about a car).  So I get that.   

That's not statistics, and that's not what we're talking about here.   I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL RISK TOLERANCES (to Hef's point above).   Anyone that knows me here should know that I'm exactly the opposite; stay the hell out of my risk/reward decisions.   I get that.  I'm talking about the next step, of trying to rationalize it through statistics, through facts. I hate to call him out, but this isn't the first time that I've been in this discussion with Swedish Goose, and he's not saying "hey, I know the data doesn't support it, but it's my opinion, I'm better to be safe than sorry!" No, he's seemingly convinced he's looking at an America that at least where I live - and remember, Sandy Hook was LITERALLY my back yard - doesn't exist. 

I'll repeat it again, for the brazilianth time: I am not telling people what to think, I'm not telling people what to believe, I'm just saying, if you're going to use DATA to rationalize your individual opinions then the DATA ought to be right, and if it isn't, I feel I'm within my bounds to point it out.

Sorry Stads but I do not agree with your interpretation of the data. Yes, it's statistics, not facts.
What have I said time and time again. There is a much greater risk of getting shot for just about any reason in the US than in about any other western country.
That is statistics.... verifyable and true on a large scale
That more guns means less people killed by guns that could perhaps be seen in some limited researches... it requires you to interpret the data as you do.

Sure... I have said again and again that the risk is not that high even in the US but it is way higher than in any other western country.

The data does support me saying that getting killed by guns is a much higher risk i  the US..

I'm not saying it is a huge risk.... it's you putting words in my mouth.... just read back in this thread and you should see it.


BTW.... have you ever been to Australia? Because you seem to imply that having never been to the US makes you not allowed to say anything about guns and their use.... and you use Australia a lot.

Sorry for the ramble.... just getting a bit pissed on my 54th birthday

Pissed as in "angry", or pissed as in "celebrating!"?  Not telling you what to do (HAHA!) but go celebrate. Happy birthday (sincerely). 

[hefdaddy42]

I mean....

*points at the thread*

I didn't even reference any actual data, and you jumped my ass.

Only because you were pissing me off.   

OK, that I can respect.

lol

[Ben_Jamin]

Does the high rate of Anxiety in the US play a role in people's perceptions of being shot when going outside their homes?

I ask because, Anxiety disorders can make people afraid to actually go out, be productive and live their lives without worry.

Worry sucks and Dying at the hands of others sucks. But, why would one live their life in constant worry.

People in the Middle East worry consistently their homes won't get blown to smithereens. There's Natives in the Amazon that worry their homelands will be taken and stripped of their livelihoods all due to Development for products and "farming".

Worrying about being shot because someone was angry at you for not giving them their food, or because you cut them off in line, is a worry I do not consider as something to actually be worried and afraid of.

People just need more courage and bravery to face those emotional fears and worry and try and handle their anxiety of what may possibly happen and just live as if it won't happen at all.

That's what I don't really understand with regards to humans having a fear for their lives, or more a fear of dying from causes one has no control over.

What does interest me though is why do people feel the need to quick fix the problem rather than taking on the task of handling the situation and dealing with it. Like, I don't want to deal with your bullshit and anger, so I'd rather just shoot you and get rid of the problem all together. Or in the case of sentencing people who do murder, want them to deal the death penalty and quick fix the problem as if there aren't others who may have the same emotional issues that cause a human to shoot another human, or more Kill another human.

[SwedishGoose]

Pissed as in "angry", or pissed as in "celebrating!"?  Not telling you what to do (HAHA!) but go celebrate. Happy birthday (sincerely).

Bit of both  .... but thanks

[Stadler]

Does the high rate of Anxiety in the US play a role in people's perceptions of being shot when going outside their homes?

I ask because, Anxiety disorders can make people afraid to actually go out, be productive and live their lives without worry.

Worry sucks and Dying at the hands of others sucks. But, why would one live their life in constant worry.

People in the Middle East worry consistently their homes won't get blown to smithereens. There's Natives in the Amazon that worry their homelands will be taken and stripped of their livelihoods all due to Development for products and "farming".

Worrying about being shot because someone was angry at you for not giving them their food, or because you cut them off in line, is a worry I do not consider as something to actually be worried and afraid of.

People just need more courage and bravery to face those emotional fears and worry and try and handle their anxiety of what may possibly happen and just live as if it won't happen at all.

That's what I don't really understand with regards to humans having a fear for their lives, or more a fear of dying from causes one has no control over.

What does interest me though is why do people feel the need to quick fix the problem rather than taking on the task of handling the situation and dealing with it. Like, I don't want to deal with your bullshit and anger, so I'd rather just shoot you and get rid of the problem all together. Or in the case of sentencing people who do murder, want them to deal the death penalty and quick fix the problem as if there aren't others who may have the same emotional issues that cause a human to shoot another human, or more Kill another human.

Chino mentioned the shootings in his part of the state, but not far from there, in the last couple days was a STABBING on the Metro-North train line, then the most hideous case of child abuse I've heard in a LONG time, if not ever.  Nothing SEXUAL, at least not in the documents that have been released, but just plain torture.  Some of the things were so bad, they didn't even HINT at them on the nightly news, just said "go to our website, they're THAT BAD".  And they are.  I mentioned the fight in New York, and you know how usually those things are "c'mon bro!" and a lot of chest puffing.  This wasn't that.  There was an intensity there; neither side would let it go.  The aggressor was standing, and, well, being aggressive, but even the passive guy, who sat the whole time, would bait and instigate, while the "friends" of both just stirred the pot. 

There's a nervous aggression out there that is palpable sometimes. It's not about "guns" , though that's the simple, easy thing to point at.  What kind of human with ANY sort of compassion or empathy or even just common decency to walk away, puts firecrackers down the pants of a five year old and lights them?  What have you so pent up that you'll stand in the street for 20 minutes or more and scream at someone you don't know for apparently no real reason other than some faux transgression against your "respect"?  Instead of stabbing someone on the train, walk the fuck away. Go home and masturbate.  Play video games.  Run around the house five times.  Punch the wall in your garage.  Drink yourself to oblivion.  But why take it out on OTHERS?  I saw it on the highway driving this past weekend; people COULD NOT let things go.  One spot in lane; what's that?  12 feet?  People are fighting over 12 feet on the highway like it's the taking of Omaha Beach.   

[Lonk]

There's a nervous aggression out there that is palpable sometimes. It's not about "guns" , though that's the simple, easy thing to point at.  What kind of human with ANY sort of compassion or empathy or even just common decency to walk away, puts firecrackers down the pants of a five year old and lights them?  What have you so pent up that you'll stand in the street for 20 minutes or more and scream at someone you don't know for apparently no real reason other than some faux transgression against your "respect"?  Instead of stabbing someone on the train, walk the fuck away. Go home and masturbate.  Play video games.  Run around the house five times.  Punch the wall in your garage.  Drink yourself to oblivion.  But why take it out on OTHERS?  I saw it on the highway driving this past weekend; people COULD NOT let things go.  One spot in lane; what's that?  12 feet?  People are fighting over 12 feet on the highway like it's the taking of Omaha Beach.

Ben is calling this fear. I would rather refer to it as emotional intelligence or self awareness. I always been the person to avoid conflict, this goes at home or outside. Just because I want to avoid the  possibility of an argument, doesn't mean I'm afraid, it just means I rather avoid an unwanted situation that could potentially lead to something else (me getting punch, shot, car crash, etc. doesn't matter, I don't want it.).

[Stadler]

There's a nervous aggression out there that is palpable sometimes. It's not about "guns" , though that's the simple, easy thing to point at.  What kind of human with ANY sort of compassion or empathy or even just common decency to walk away, puts firecrackers down the pants of a five year old and lights them?  What have you so pent up that you'll stand in the street for 20 minutes or more and scream at someone you don't know for apparently no real reason other than some faux transgression against your "respect"?  Instead of stabbing someone on the train, walk the fuck away. Go home and masturbate.  Play video games.  Run around the house five times.  Punch the wall in your garage.  Drink yourself to oblivion.  But why take it out on OTHERS?  I saw it on the highway driving this past weekend; people COULD NOT let things go.  One spot in lane; what's that?  12 feet?  People are fighting over 12 feet on the highway like it's the taking of Omaha Beach.

Ben is calling this fear. I would rather refer to it as emotional intelligence or self awareness. I always been the person to avoid conflict, this goes at home or outside. Just because I want to avoid the  possibility of an argument, doesn't mean I'm afraid, it just means I rather avoid an unwanted situation that could potentially lead to something else (me getting punch, shot, car crash, etc. doesn't matter, I don't want it.).

Well, that's just it; I've been in my scrapes in the past.  I played hockey!   I have my insecurities like anyone else - being honest, my post count may have something to do with that - but I'm dealing with them.  Therapy.  Playstation.  Blue Moon.  I'm not getting any self-affirmation from keeping that asshole from getting in front of me on the highway. I turn up the Rainbow on the CD and look at the scenery.

[soupytwist]

I'd throw my McFlurry at the back of their car,  laughing as it explodes on there window shouting 'YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT HUH? BITCH!'.....then I'd be sad as I no longer had a McFlurry.  At this point he'd get out and shoot me.

[Stadler]

I'd throw my McFlurry at the back of their car,  laughing as it explodes on there window shouting 'YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT HUH? BITCH!'.....then I'd be sad as I no longer had a McFlurry.  At this point he'd get out and shoot me.

But you wouldn't care, because you no longer had a McFlurry!   The last thing I'd do is throw my food. .

[Skeever]

Stats aren't everything, though. Stats are important, they help us "examine the evidence" and ground ourselves. But at the same time, SwedishGoose and Zantera get to live in countries where they can go to the movies or a mall without the thought entering their minds that there might be some kind of shooting or attack. These days are behind me, as an American. I can not go to a movie theater, or the mall, or a parade, without thinking about the possibility of a shooting or some other kind of mass casualty event. I can't send my kid to school without the thought of a shooting in the back of my mind. So in that sense, I don't think they're wrong at all, if those two posters were Americans, there's a decent chance they'd be thinking about things just like how I am.

"The Stats" are important, but not in a way that convinces me that "everything is fine", but more in a way that reminds me that, even though everything's not fine, chances are slim that I'll be impacted. Whether the "perception" is "reality" is besides the point - the perception itself is a real thing, and one of the unique characteristics of the American experience at this point.

But it's important to do as you've done, and separate the two.  Look, you're not talking to a stone; I was at dinner last Tuesday in New York, sitting at a table on the street and a fight broke out at the Irish bar next door (no, not making that up).   We all looked at each other, and watched the events very carefully; at one point the aggressor walked down the center of the street away from the bar (but past us) and every one of us watched carefully.  I for one was prepared - at least in theory - if the event escalated to either guns or something else (I was also worried about a car).  So I get that.   

That's not statistics, and that's not what we're talking about here.   I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL RISK TOLERANCES (to Hef's point above).   Anyone that knows me here should know that I'm exactly the opposite; stay the hell out of my risk/reward decisions.   I get that.  I'm talking about the next step, of trying to rationalize it through statistics, through facts. I hate to call him out, but this isn't the first time that I've been in this discussion with Swedish Goose, and he's not saying "hey, I know the data doesn't support it, but it's my opinion, I'm better to be safe than sorry!" No, he's seemingly convinced he's looking at an America that at least where I live - and remember, Sandy Hook was LITERALLY my back yard - doesn't exist. 

I'll repeat it again, for the brazilianth time: I am not telling people what to think, I'm not telling people what to believe, I'm just saying, if you're going to use DATA to rationalize your individual opinions then the DATA ought to be right, and if it isn't, I feel I'm within my bounds to point it out.

I get where you are coming from, but I don't see people using data to rationalize their perception. What I see is people voicing a certain perception, and then the data being presented in a way to make the argument that people are wrong to feel the way they feel. For me, the data helps. The "perception" may be that it's not even safe to go out anymore, but if we look at the data, we can say "well, there may be more gun events here than anywhere else, but the chances of it happening to me are still slim". At this point, though, the data still suggests that there is something wrong, and that the problem isn't just in peoples heads. People may admit that their perception is off or exaggerated when they see the data, but I do think we are far past the point where the data would lead anyone to believe that we don't have a problem. The place where I live is currently constantly reminding people that, of the year's 1200 shootings at counting, only 350 have been fatal. That's where we're currently at, as a society. Similar to COVID, "hey, most people who get it aren't even dying from it!" I feel I've got every right to be outraged about this; you (public officials the CEO, whatever) want me to work in this place, hang out after hours, spend money here, bring my family here on weekends and not just be a remote worker or be a "quiet quitter" who heads right to the parking garage at the end of the day? Start by convincing me that my perception is wrong!

[Stadler]

Stats aren't everything, though. Stats are important, they help us "examine the evidence" and ground ourselves. But at the same time, SwedishGoose and Zantera get to live in countries where they can go to the movies or a mall without the thought entering their minds that there might be some kind of shooting or attack. These days are behind me, as an American. I can not go to a movie theater, or the mall, or a parade, without thinking about the possibility of a shooting or some other kind of mass casualty event. I can't send my kid to school without the thought of a shooting in the back of my mind. So in that sense, I don't think they're wrong at all, if those two posters were Americans, there's a decent chance they'd be thinking about things just like how I am.

"The Stats" are important, but not in a way that convinces me that "everything is fine", but more in a way that reminds me that, even though everything's not fine, chances are slim that I'll be impacted. Whether the "perception" is "reality" is besides the point - the perception itself is a real thing, and one of the unique characteristics of the American experience at this point.

But it's important to do as you've done, and separate the two.  Look, you're not talking to a stone; I was at dinner last Tuesday in New York, sitting at a table on the street and a fight broke out at the Irish bar next door (no, not making that up).   We all looked at each other, and watched the events very carefully; at one point the aggressor walked down the center of the street away from the bar (but past us) and every one of us watched carefully.  I for one was prepared - at least in theory - if the event escalated to either guns or something else (I was also worried about a car).  So I get that.   

That's not statistics, and that's not what we're talking about here.   I'm NOT TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE'S INDIVIDUAL RISK TOLERANCES (to Hef's point above).   Anyone that knows me here should know that I'm exactly the opposite; stay the hell out of my risk/reward decisions.   I get that.  I'm talking about the next step, of trying to rationalize it through statistics, through facts. I hate to call him out, but this isn't the first time that I've been in this discussion with Swedish Goose, and he's not saying "hey, I know the data doesn't support it, but it's my opinion, I'm better to be safe than sorry!" No, he's seemingly convinced he's looking at an America that at least where I live - and remember, Sandy Hook was LITERALLY my back yard - doesn't exist. 

I'll repeat it again, for the brazilianth time: I am not telling people what to think, I'm not telling people what to believe, I'm just saying, if you're going to use DATA to rationalize your individual opinions then the DATA ought to be right, and if it isn't, I feel I'm within my bounds to point it out.

I get where you are coming from, but I don't see people using data to rationalize their perception. What I see is people voicing a certain perception, and then the data being presented in a way to make the argument that people are wrong to feel the way they feel. For me, the data helps. The "perception" may be that it's not even safe to go out anymore, but if we look at the data, we can say "well, there may be more gun events here than anywhere else, but the chances of it happening to me are still slim". At this point, though, the data still suggests that there is something wrong, and that the problem isn't just in peoples heads. People may admit that their perception is off or exaggerated when they see the data, but I do think we are far past the point where the data would lead anyone to believe that we don't have a problem. The place where I live is currently constantly reminding people that, of the year's 1200 shootings at counting, only 350 have been fatal. That's where we're currently at, as a society. Similar to COVID, "hey, most people who get it aren't even dying from it!" I feel I've got every right to be outraged about this; you (public officials the CEO, whatever) want me to work in this place, hang out after hours, spend money here, bring my family here on weekends and not just be a remote worker or be a "quiet quitter" who heads right to the parking garage at the end of the day? Start by convincing me that my perception is wrong!

If that's the case, then that's my failure and I own it.  I'm sorry for that.  I'm not perfect, and sometimes in searching for different ways to say the same thing, it's hard to stay pure in that regard.  It's just frustrating; Hef - and I think quasi-jokingly - said I have a "hard-on for guns".   No, not even close.   But I do have a hard-on for keeping people alive, and for preserving our liberties.  We can do both, and every minute perpetuating the myth that we live in a real-life game of Call Of Duty prevents that.   I KNOW people that were shot in Sandy Hook (well, the parents, not the kids themselves).  That was home, that was my back yard.   I don't want that to happen again.  Individuals can have whatever perception they want, but then there's the pesky part about "voting".  POLITICIANS can't work on perception. They need to work on facts.  And so as long as the people who vote are mistakenly pointing at guns, we will have politicians that focus on guns, and our mental wellness is going to continue to spiral into the shitter, and kids are going to continue to die.   

It's not relevant to the drive-thru conversation, so I didn't say it, but SG keeps talking about the "rates"; and nominally he's right.  But the vast majority of those stats are "deaths caused by gun" and so include suicides.  Something like 55% - it may be more now, since suicides are still sky-rocketing in America - of deaths caused by guns are suicides.  So you and I have no risk of being shot in that instance.   So the rate is at best half of what it's usually projected as.  Then, and I cited this article above, about half of the firearm deaths caused by others are situational, meaning it's crime related, in low-income neighborhoods, and - and this is not racist, this just information and fact - involving persons of color ("According to the CDC, about 14,500 Americans were murdered with guns in 2017. More than half were young black men killed in metro areas, which has been the pattern for at least the last five years, data shows.")  So in terms of a random shooting on the highway, we've just cut the rate AGAIN.   If the point is not just to make guns the scapegoat, but to keep people alive, why the need to "pad the stats"?  Why the need to obfuscate and create the narrative?   Yeah, our rate is still high, but not "off the charts" like so many people say.

You be you, perceive what you want, stay in your car if you want (you probably should anyway, and who cares if it's for the right or wrong reasons?) but when it comes to acting, voting, or otherwise influencing policy, the truth MATTERS. 

[Ben_Jamin]

There's a nervous aggression out there that is palpable sometimes. It's not about "guns" , though that's the simple, easy thing to point at.  What kind of human with ANY sort of compassion or empathy or even just common decency to walk away, puts firecrackers down the pants of a five year old and lights them?  What have you so pent up that you'll stand in the street for 20 minutes or more and scream at someone you don't know for apparently no real reason other than some faux transgression against your "respect"?  Instead of stabbing someone on the train, walk the fuck away. Go home and masturbate.  Play video games.  Run around the house five times.  Punch the wall in your garage.  Drink yourself to oblivion.  But why take it out on OTHERS?  I saw it on the highway driving this past weekend; people COULD NOT let things go.  One spot in lane; what's that?  12 feet?  People are fighting over 12 feet on the highway like it's the taking of Omaha Beach.

Ben is calling this fear. I would rather refer to it as emotional intelligence or self awareness. I always been the person to avoid conflict, this goes at home or outside. Just because I want to avoid the  possibility of an argument, doesn't mean I'm afraid, it just means I rather avoid an unwanted situation that could potentially lead to something else (me getting punch, shot, car crash, etc. doesn't matter, I don't want it.).

What I am considering Fear, is the fear of what those people who do not have "Emotional Intelligence" or "Self-awarenees" may do to someone. The response to that worry and fear is the flight response, to not confront and escalate the situation into something worse. And there is nothing wrong with that. I've done that plenty of times, but I admit it's because I worry about what outcome is probable to occur.

There's drugs out there that can cause you to lose all control of that Self-awarenees that you do things you otherwise wouldn't do to feel that fix. Lots of people are on these drugs, and more than likely, you wouldn't know otherwise, since they do not fit the general stereotype of a drug addict.

Alcohol, and even Steroids, can make people lose Self-awareness.  And believe me, I've seen people do some questionable stuff while drunk at concerts, such as taking a piss in the pit.

There's so much going on in this world that people are becoming frustrated at it. They're becoming frustrated at their life and are taking those frustrations out on the masses, taking the anger and frustration out onto the world.

It's good others can afford the luxury of playing games, drinking, or therapy, but not everyone can or has that opportunity. And that itself builds onto their frustrations and their decision to just say, "Fuck it" and go out guns ablazing.

And this builds and is molded from childhood. A lot of people have traumas that end up causing them to not know how to handle or deal with these emotions. They don't know how to be "Emotionally Intelligent".

[Stadler]

There's so much going on in this world that people are becoming frustrated at it. They're becoming frustrated at their life and are taking those frustrations out on the masses, taking the anger and frustration out onto the world.

It's good others can afford the luxury of playing games, drinking, or therapy, but not everyone can or has that opportunity. And that itself builds onto their frustrations and their decision to just say, "Fuck it" and go out guns ablazing.

And this builds and is molded from childhood. A lot of people have traumas that end up causing them to not know how to handle or deal with these emotions. They don't know how to be "Emotionally Intelligent".

And this is the part that  fascinates me.  The frustration, and how it builds.  I don't mind calling it "emotional intelligence", but why now?  Why us (that's a loaded question, since I don't think it's just us)?   We've become a nation of traumas; I've said here before that when everyone has a story, no one has a story, and I feel like there's an element of truth in there that is manifesting itself.  I think this is a REALLY complicated mechanism working here.  I've noticed, within myself and with the help of my therapist, how more and more things are leading to frustrations.   Some - most - is easily diffused; I was rather bothered by the recent student loan announcement, and the arbitrariness and selectivity of it.  It's a political sop, nothing more.  And it was quickly dissipated as I dove into my new issue of Games magazine. 

I'm not sure I buy the argument that "not everyone can play games, drink or go to therapy".  Everybody DOES, as part of the social contract, have the responsibility to control their emotions. We've so celebrated in recent years this baring of souls, but it's backfiring.  That's NOT how you diffuse these things. They ultimately have to be dealt with.  And that goes for solving the problem; sure, we're going to ban guns and we'll MAYBE stop (I don't think they will, but I'm willing to dream here) the catastrophic event, but that's just pushing the problem under the rug. That's like putting extra ketchup on a burned hot dog; underneath it's still burned.  And when the guns are gone, what's next? 

[King Postwhore]

Somewhere in the 2000's we turned into a me generation.  Whatever the thought process it is, it's strickly about oneself. Sense of entitlement is at an all time high.

[Adami]

Somewhere in the 2000's we turned into a me generation.  Whatever the thought process it is, it's strickly about oneself. Sense of entitlement is at an all time high.

I’d say it’s a product of the toxic individualism that America (and some others) harp on.

[King Postwhore]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

[Stadler]

Somewhere in the 2000's we turned into a me generation.  Whatever the thought process it is, it's strickly about oneself. Sense of entitlement is at an all time high.

I’d say it’s a product of the toxic individualism that America (and some others) harp on.

Yet we continue to celebrate it.  It's a badge of honor for many people and we encourage that, implicitly or explicitly.

[Stadler]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

That's another one; I say "Excuse me" - as in, "I'm sorry I'm in your way or am otherwise a bother" - all the time, and the reaction I get probably more than 75 or 80% of the time is one that can only mean they assume I meant it in the "get out of my way, dickhead" way. 

[Adami]

Somewhere in the 2000's we turned into a me generation.  Whatever the thought process it is, it's strickly about oneself. Sense of entitlement is at an all time high.

I’d say it’s a product of the toxic individualism that America (and some others) harp on.

Yet we continue to celebrate it.  It's a badge of honor for many people and we encourage that, implicitly or explicitly.

I agree. Though probably not the way you meant it.

[Harmony]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

That's another one; I say "Excuse me" - as in, "I'm sorry I'm in your way or am otherwise a bother" - all the time, and the reaction I get probably more than 75 or 80% of the time is one that can only mean they assume I meant it in the "get out of my way, dickhead" way.

Can we blame Steve Martin for that?

[XJDenton]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

Not returning the cart to the corral?

[King Postwhore]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

Not returning the cart to the corral?

You complete me.

[TAC]

Programmed by The Man.

[ReaPsTA]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

Not returning the cart to the corral?

  yup

[lonestar]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

Not returning the cart to the corral?

You complete me.

 

[hefdaddy42]

Of definitely. I see it in the little things.

Not holding doors for others.
Saying excuse me even though it might not be your fault.
Ect...

Not returning the cart to the corral?

There it is

[Stadler]

SO.... not drive through, but I thought even though this was a travel issue, it fit this conversation better.  I'm sure it will spill into the P/R thread too.   

I flew home from Florida on Saturday.  Had a 6:30 flight from Sarasota, direct to Hartford. I was in the ass end, with only carry on, so I asked the guy at the desk for a seat closer to the front. He said, I have first row, and I'll let you board with Zone 1 so you can put your bag up.  Deal!   I'm basically first on the plane, after two families.  One family was waiting patiently to board, and the other was a hot mess.  Dad was a pistol, he had all the tickets but apparently didn't have them ready to be scanned, but Jackson, his kid, was already half way down the jet way. He let the kid go, then the ticket agent said, no, he can't board until we have the tickets scanned, so he's yelling to Jackson... a mess.  Mom is off somewhere else with the other kid, but finally they board, right in front of me.  So they get on and they see the other family, and apparently they must have known them from the beach or something because Mom says "Oh, we like you, we'll sit here" and they plop in the fourth row.  She's like "we'll figure it out!" and starts asking everyone, including me, what seats we have.  I didn't get the whole story, but apparently they had the other three seats in the front row, and one seat somewhere else.  (For the record, and you'll see why, I would have GLADLY moved had I been asked or had I known the issue before hand, but I did not. Other than one question  - "what seat do you have?" - I had nothing do to with anything below, and only found out after the fact what went down).   

So finally the REAL occupants of row 4 board.  And mom says, "well, why don't you just sit there for now (row 1) until we figure it out".  So they're not really cool with that, and ask the attendant to help.  It went sideways from there very quickly.  The real row 4 was cramped into the galley, because they couldn't block the aisle, and the family wasn't budging from row 4.  The attendant punted very quickly and said "let me get the gate agent down here" and he (the guy that helped me) came down.  He asked the family to go to their seats and let the row 4 people sit and see where it shook out.  She escalated and says "well I have a kid that will be sitting by themselves!" (doesn't take Einstein to put the parent in the single seat but that's me) and doesn't move.  The rest happened in about three minutes:  they were told to take their seats or leave the plane (they did neither).  Then they were told to leave the plane, and they started to argue.  Then they were told the police were coming and one of the kids started crying, saying "are we going to be arrested?".  Dad finally went to row one with the two kids, but bitched and kept asking, "you're going to separate me from my kids?" though I couldn't figure out how that was happening.  They were told again to leave the plane and mom kicked it into overdrive.  "I'll pay for the seats!" and "We just want to go home, we'll behave" and "you're going to throw my kids off the plane?" and "My mom is sick, I have to be home tonight for my mom!" and "have you no soul? (while crying)".  Police came, boarded the plane and the lead officer said (very calmly and with quiet authority) "look, move to the jet way or we will be forced to empty the entire plane and that will be on you."  The crying kid then walked off the plane, so now you had one kid on the jetway and two parents and kid arguing in the aisle.  Dad got smart and walked out to be with his daughter, and the other kid followed.  Mom took more coercing, begging, and even went to shame: "So who was it?  Who wanted their seats so badly that they had to complain?  Who was it that thought this was worth it?" then she finally left, and the plane burst into applause.

It was everything I write about here.  They were entitled, the rules didn't apply to them, and they felt they could drive the narrative of boarding the plane.  But then when "authority" pushed back, it was every story, every excuse, every reason why they should get special treatment, but other than one statement "we'll behave" there was absolutely ZERO accountability or culpability.   They never once took responsibility for the circumstances, or the situation they put the plane and it's crew in. We were almost an hour late in taking off, and I thank GOD that was Sarasota and not O'hare or Atlanta, because I have zero doubt we would have been delayed longer for missing our window.  And I feel bad for the kids; what lesson was that for them? 

[hefdaddy42]

I don't see anything P/R related there.  They were beyond entitled.  They were complete assholes.

[Implode]

That is incredibly bizarre. Unfortunate that everyone on the plane had to witness such an embarrassing display.

[Lonk]

I've witnessed similar situations with parents not wanting to be away from their kids. However, every time they asked nicely for people to switch seats. Heck, I love my window seats and I gave it up once to let a family sit together.

So it was the 2 parents and 2 kids? and they had 3 front row seats? Why not have 1 parent with 2 kids and the other parent by themselves?

[Harmony]

I'm sorry but those parents should be banned from flying for a few years.  At least on that airline.

Absolutely horrible.  And honestly?  One of maybe 3 reasons I refuse to fly.  The airlines need to get a handle on these incidents and put some real teeth behind consequences.  I know I am not the only person who refuses to fly right now.  And yes - I realize some people don't have any choice but to fly.

Plane travel has turned into Greyhound.  I literally hate everything about it.  And stories like this just solidify my feelings on it.

[Dave_Manchester]

and "have you no soul? (while crying)". 

Call me callous but I lol'd hard at this part.

[lonestar]

and "have you no soul? (while crying)". 

Call me callous but I lol'd hard at this part.

I can literally hear it.


My only regret is that Stads didn't pull out his phone and record all of this for our stern judgements

[SwedishGoose]

It's not like they were spread out over the plane.
1 parent with the 2 kids and 1 parent in another seat. If it was a long flight they could have switched which parent was with the kids.