Frat Made To Apologize Over Anti-Sexual Assault Banners

[DudeistBelieve]

Heard of bear mace? Well I got Bear Grenades! Pull the tab and run for cover cause you'll be covered in bear meat, yo

Are these bear grenades that are built to solely kill bears, or bear grenades that explode into many bears that rain down with vengeance upon unsuspecting victims? Bear mace sounds like a high class purfume i would use during mating season. Yet they still always run. Maybe i should stop spraying it in their eyes for once.

Kills bears, of course! Why would it create more bears? That would defeat the purposes.

While we're on the subject of bears though, ever hear about crush cages? S'fucked up.

 

[JimB]

Can I judge you for being a Shyguy?

Sure, if you're a racist!

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Kills bears, of course! Why would it create more bears? That would defeat the purposes.

While we're on the subject of bears though, ever hear about crush cages? S'fucked up.

Ah, yes...perhaps creating an army of disgruntled bears would be a little counterproductive in many ways. Only heard the term in passing before, but after a quick ole info search, they do appear to be utilised for some horrific uses. The bile bear business looks a seriously messed up thing to do. Found this article too, which is unpleasant on every level;

http://disinfo.com/2011/08/mother-bear-kills-cub-and-itself-to-escape-crush-cage-torture-for-bear-bile/

Humans

 

[Strazdas]

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2016/05/02/campus/following-banner-controversy-interfraternity-council-plans-to-implement-four-year-sexual-assault-education-program/

It appears that at least some of those who did the complaining did so under the belief (justified or not) that sexual assaults had occurred in that frat, and also under the impression that the frat was treating this as all they needed to do to show they had become an enlightened anti-sexual assault frat. Without further evidence for or against those accusations I don't know whether I can agree with those who complained, but assuming their accusations are true, I'd say I agree with their complaints.

I think i found the main point where you are coming to this conclusion from:

The article said: " some students said were in poor taste due to the pervasiveness of sexual assault in fraternities." I could not find anything more conclusive in the article you linked other than them flat out admitting to want to brainwash people into "correct way of thinking".

Now, given that we know for a fact that fraternities does not actually have increased risk of sexual assault, it seems like a huge overreaction and waste of money that could be used to help actual victims of sexual assault instead of "Teaching" people who never did nor ever intended to commit those crimes.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

http://dailynorthwestern.com/2016/05/02/campus/following-banner-controversy-interfraternity-council-plans-to-implement-four-year-sexual-assault-education-program/

It appears that at least some of those who did the complaining did so under the belief (justified or not) that sexual assaults had occurred in that frat, and also under the impression that the frat was treating this as all they needed to do to show they had become an enlightened anti-sexual assault frat. Without further evidence for or against those accusations I don't know whether I can agree with those who complained, but assuming their accusations are true, I'd say I agree with their complaints.

I think i found the main point where you are coming to this conclusion from:

The article said: " some students said were in poor taste due to the pervasiveness of sexual assault in fraternities." I could not find anything more conclusive in the article you linked other than them flat out admitting to want to brainwash people into "correct way of thinking".

Now, given that we know for a fact that fraternities does not actually have increased risk of sexual assault, it seems like a huge overreaction and waste of money that could be used to help actual victims of sexual assault instead of "Teaching" people who never did nor ever intended to commit those crimes.

One of the two people quoted who had apparently complained said that it seemed wrong that these banners were being hung up in front of places where sexual assaults had occurred. That's it. That's all I was quoting. I was trying to find an article that had actual information. And given how little you apparently care about this issue, I don't know why you feel the need to make speculations about all this on such empty evidence.

Also, I'm not seeing where yo liked the article that supports that rather bold statement, that fraternities do not ave higher rates of sexual assault. Further, lower rates doesn't mean it doesn't happen and that the cultures of those fraternities don't sometimes get in the way of seeing justice done.

Finally, as someone who was a victim of sexual assault, of rape, perpetrated by somebody who was mostly just ignorant and possibly a victim themselves, I sure as hell see the importance of teaching people about the issue. You see, unlike you apparently, this is my fucking problem, I give a damn, and I don't want other kids going through what I did.

 

[Strazdas]

One of the two people quoted who had apparently complained said that it seemed wrong that these banners were being hung up in front of places where sexual assaults had occurred. That's it. That's all I was quoting. I was trying to find an article that had actual information. And given how little you apparently care about this issue, I don't know why you feel the need to make speculations about all this on such empty evidence.

Also, I'm not seeing where yo liked the article that supports that rather bold statement, that fraternities do not ave higher rates of sexual assault. Further, lower rates doesn't mean it doesn't happen and that the cultures of those fraternities don't sometimes get in the way of seeing justice done.

Finally, as someone who was a victim of sexual assault, of rape, perpetrated by somebody who was mostly just ignorant and possibly a victim themselves, I sure as hell see the importance of teaching people about the issue. You see, unlike you apparently, this is my fucking problem, I give a damn, and I don't want other kids going through what I did.

Im not the one making speculations though. I said that the article has provided no information as to the claims that you have expressed in the post i quoted. Futhermore, statistics show that such claims are unlikely. I would prefer if we first found out that those people actually did any sexual assault before we condemn them, but maybe im just oldfashioned that way.

Since you requested a link, heres some comprehensive statistics comparing students to nonstudents:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

Yes, it does happen, but if college campus is special in any way it is special in that its victimization rate is lower than the rest of the country. Clearly whatever they are doing - it works better than elsewhere in the country. Futhermore, the study i linked comcludes that the cultures has no impact on sexual assault and the biggest contributor is repeat offenders from a small number of perpetrators.

Or you know you could spend this money instead for catching those repeat offenders - instead if preaching to the choir.

 

[Something Amyss]

Can I judge you for being a Shyguy?

Sure, if you're a racist!

Look, you can #notallshyguys all you want, but when Wart took over Subcon, I didn't see you out there protesting Shyguy attacks on Italian plumbers. Do you know how many lives I lost in that game?

 

[JimB]

Can I judge you for being a Shyguy?

Sure, if you're a racist!

Look, you can #notallshyguys all you want, but when Wart took over Subcon, I didn't see you out there protesting Shyguy attacks on Italian plumbers. Do you know how many lives I lost in that game?

Am I supposed to be outraged when fine, upstanding Shyguys protect themselves from, I'm sorry, thugs who just want to loot our vegetable gardens to feed their slot machine habits? Yeah, right. This is PC shaming culture at its most blatant. And you're a censor, censoring me...somehow. I'll figure out how. Don't you worry about that.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

One of the two people quoted who had apparently complained said that it seemed wrong that these banners were being hung up in front of places where sexual assaults had occurred. That's it. That's all I was quoting. I was trying to find an article that had actual information. And given how little you apparently care about this issue, I don't know why you feel the need to make speculations about all this on such empty evidence.

Also, I'm not seeing where yo liked the article that supports that rather bold statement, that fraternities do not ave higher rates of sexual assault. Further, lower rates doesn't mean it doesn't happen and that the cultures of those fraternities don't sometimes get in the way of seeing justice done.

Finally, as someone who was a victim of sexual assault, of rape, perpetrated by somebody who was mostly just ignorant and possibly a victim themselves, I sure as hell see the importance of teaching people about the issue. You see, unlike you apparently, this is my fucking problem, I give a damn, and I don't want other kids going through what I did.

Im not the one making speculations though. I said that the article has provided no information as to the claims that you have expressed in the post i quoted. Futhermore, statistics show that such claims are unlikely. I would prefer if we first found out that those people actually did any sexual assault before we condemn them, but maybe im just oldfashioned that way.

Since you requested a link, heres some comprehensive statistics comparing students to nonstudents:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

Yes, it does happen, but if college campus is special in any way it is special in that its victimization rate is lower than the rest of the country. Clearly whatever they are doing - it works better than elsewhere in the country. Futhermore, the study i linked comcludes that the cultures has no impact on sexual assault and the biggest contributor is repeat offenders from a small number of perpetrators.

Or you know you could spend this money instead for catching those repeat offenders - instead if preaching to the choir.

Ok, good thing that my post said that if their claims were true, if sexual assaults had occurred at some of those frats and they were viewing these banners as the only thing they ought to do to address the issue, then the outrage would be warranted. I'm a programmer, not a politician. When I make an if then statement, I'm not assuming the the first part is already true.

That study leans on another which seems to imply victimization rates between students and non-students have closed within recent years. Also, frats and sororities are not the sum of college culture. Victimization rates could be higher or lower there than among students who live in dorms or elsewhere off campus. You said that frats in particular are unlikely to be a problem. I'm more inclined to believe that as students are educated and generally better off, they are less likely to commit and be victims of sexual assault, and that frats are either not relevant to this issue, or have a negative impact.

Those very repeat offenders could easily be fraternity brother protecting each other from reprisal, or professors or administrators using their power over students to get away with abusing them, or just about anybody. You've got nothing to show that fraternities are unlikely to be part of the issue.

Also, what page is the part that concludes that a small number of repeat offenders make up a huge impact? I've skimmed through a few times and haven't found it. Not saying you're just making up, I'd just like to see for myself.

 

[Strazdas]

Ok, good thing that my post said that if their claims were true, if sexual assaults had occurred at some of those frats and they were viewing these banners as the only thing they ought to do to address the issue, then the outrage would be warranted. I'm a programmer, not a politician. When I make an if then statement, I'm not assuming the the first part is already true.

That study leans on another which seems to imply victimization rates between students and non-students have closed within recent years. Also, frats and sororities are not the sum of college culture. Victimization rates could be higher or lower there than among students who live in dorms or elsewhere off campus. You said that frats in particular are unlikely to be a problem. I'm more inclined to believe that as students are educated and generally better off, they are less likely to commit and be victims of sexual assault, and that frats are either not relevant to this issue, or have a negative impact.

Those very repeat offenders could easily be fraternity brother protecting each other from reprisal, or professors or administrators using their power over students to get away with abusing them, or just about anybody. You've got nothing to show that fraternities are unlikely to be part of the issue.

Also, what page is the part that concludes that a small number of repeat offenders make up a huge impact? I've skimmed through a few times and haven't found it. Not saying you're just making up, I'd just like to see for myself.

Right, then i have misunderstood the tone of your post.

The victimiztion rates have closed by both of them going down, nonstudent ones going down faster and therefore catching up. Note how the rates are lowesst they have ever been, showing that there is no imminent problem, or as the media put it "Epidemic".

No, i said that campus area (which include frats in them) are unlikely to be a problem, given that their rates are lower than average and that we had multiple cases of false claims in recent years that ended up hurting fraternities to the point where they would be afraid to even create doubts, let alone commit it.

No, i think fraternities have positive impact. People living in fraternities tend to support eachother psichologically and thus if one member strays into a criminal behaviuor it is likely that the others would notice and try to stop him, which would not happen if he lived alone.

And you got nothing to show that fraternities are likely to be part of the issue.

As for repeat ones, sorry, i read that in other studies. For example this one:
"representing only 4% of the sample, the repeat rapists accounted for 28% of the violence."
Page 8, http://www.davidlisak.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/RepeatRapeinUndetectedRapists.pdf

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Ok, good thing that my post said that if their claims were true, if sexual assaults had occurred at some of those frats and they were viewing these banners as the only thing they ought to do to address the issue, then the outrage would be warranted. I'm a programmer, not a politician. When I make an if then statement, I'm not assuming the the first part is already true.

That study leans on another which seems to imply victimization rates between students and non-students have closed within recent years. Also, frats and sororities are not the sum of college culture. Victimization rates could be higher or lower there than among students who live in dorms or elsewhere off campus. You said that frats in particular are unlikely to be a problem. I'm more inclined to believe that as students are educated and generally better off, they are less likely to commit and be victims of sexual assault, and that frats are either not relevant to this issue, or have a negative impact.

Those very repeat offenders could easily be fraternity brother protecting each other from reprisal, or professors or administrators using their power over students to get away with abusing them, or just about anybody. You've got nothing to show that fraternities are unlikely to be part of the issue.

Also, what page is the part that concludes that a small number of repeat offenders make up a huge impact? I've skimmed through a few times and haven't found it. Not saying you're just making up, I'd just like to see for myself.

Right, then i have misunderstood the tone of your post.

The victimiztion rates have closed by both of them going down, nonstudent ones going down faster and therefore catching up. Note how the rates are lowesst they have ever been, showing that there is no imminent problem, or as the media put it "Epidemic".

Which means that there is no longer a decreased risk with being on a college campus.

What sexual assault rates would you deem acceptable, or at least not bad enough to make a big deal of? I still think the rates are dramatically too high myself.

No, i said that campus area (which include frats in them) are unlikely to be a problem, given that their rates are lower than average and that we had multiple cases of false claims in recent years that ended up hurting fraternities to the point where they would be afraid to even create doubts, let alone commit it.

Spoiler: No, you said this

Now, given that we know for a fact that fraternities does not actually have increased risk of sexual assault

That's not the same. You made the positive statement that they have no increased risk, not that schooling has no increased risk.

No, i think fraternities have positive impact. People living in fraternities tend to support eachother psichologically and thus if one member strays into a criminal behaviuor it is likely that the others would notice and try to stop him, which would not happen if he lived alone.

And you got nothing to show that fraternities are likely to be part of the issue.

You're the one who made the claim they did not increase the problem. You made the claim, you defend it. I'm mostly under the impression they probably have a net zero impact on the issue, some are part of the problem and may protect those who cross the line, but it seems unlikely that most would fall into this group. All kinds of groups do this, not just frats, so I don't think their existence makes things worse, without them assaulters would just go to different groups for protection.

ALso, cultural reinforcement of criminal behaviors is just as possible.

As for repeat ones, sorry, i read that in other studies. For example this one:
"representing only 4% of the sample, the repeat rapists accounted for 28% of the violence."
Page 8, http://www.davidlisak.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/RepeatRapeinUndetectedRapists.pdf

Ah. Well, it seems odd to me to use a survey of attackers to find that information, but I've never seen any study stating anonymous surveys don't work for negative behavior, so I'll assume that's accurate. I mean, it also makes sense, mathematically that is roughly what you would expect, if not an even more uneven distribution, so I'd assume it was accurate anyway. The paper does site some other studies to show that this is a valid way to get this kind of information as well. Just seems odd though.

 

[Strazdas]

Which means that there is no longer a decreased risk with being on a college campus.

What sexual assault rates would you deem acceptable, or at least not bad enough to make a big deal of? I still think the rates are dramatically too high myself.

There is, just the gap is not as big as it was before. I would say that given that the rates have been falling for many years and panicking for 20 years straight is not something that is even possible, current rates are not bad enough to make a big deal off. you know when we should make a big deal? when the rates are increasing. As far as current rates go, the society has survived far higher rates for far longer. its going to survive this as well. Sure, in ideal world the rate would be 0, but were not in ideal world, so we have to balance between human rights and our ability to catch every criminal. so yes, i do think a certain crime rate is acceptable if the alternative is removal of your rights.

That's not the same. You made the positive statement that they have no increased risk, not that schooling has no increased risk.

Fraternities, being part of campuses, have no increased risk because campuses overall have no increased risk. Im sorry if i was not clear enough about this.

ALso, cultural reinforcement of criminal behaviors is just as possible.

This requires the criminal behaviuor to be considered culturally acceptable. Rape is not culturally acceptable, therefore this is extremely unlikely and would only happen in very small echochamber groups.

Just seems odd though.

While i have no studies, in my opinion this kind of distribution would also exist in many other crimes. Especially if we count organized crime in that are the biggest repeat offenders.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

Which means that there is no longer a decreased risk with being on a college campus.

What sexual assault rates would you deem acceptable, or at least not bad enough to make a big deal of? I still think the rates are dramatically too high myself.

There is, just the gap is not as big as it was before. I would say that given that the rates have been falling for many years and panicking for 20 years straight is not something that is even possible, current rates are not bad enough to make a big deal off. you know when we should make a big deal? when the rates are increasing. As far as current rates go, the society has survived far higher rates for far longer. its going to survive this as well. Sure, in ideal world the rate would be 0, but were not in ideal world, so we have to balance between human rights and our ability to catch every criminal. so yes, i do think a certain crime rate is acceptable if the alternative is removal of your rights.

We've also survived worse racism, worse corruption in politics, worse political discourse, more authoritarian regimes... but, vaguely middle eastern looking people still get horribly mistreated, our political system needs fixing, Fox news is atrocious, and our 4th amendment rights are being regularly ignored. Also, Trump is a real person who fits every one of those issues like a glove.

That's not the same. You made the positive statement that they have no increased risk, not that schooling has no increased risk.

Fraternities, being part of campuses, have no increased risk because campuses overall have no increased risk. Im sorry if i was not clear enough about this.

Schools are part of society at large, so they can't have a decreased risk. Or, to explain this in my vernacular-

if A+B+C = D and D > 0 then A,B,C > 0

-is a false statement.

ALso, cultural reinforcement of criminal behaviors is just as possible.

This requires the criminal behaviuor to be considered culturally acceptable. Rape is not culturally acceptable, therefore this is extremely unlikely and would only happen in very small echochamber groups.

Theft is not culturally acceptable, murder is not culturally acceptable, drug trafficking is not culturally acceptable, killing police is not culturally acceptable, and human trafficking is not culturally acceptable, but various organized crime organizations got a whole lot of people to accept all of the above.

Just seems odd though.

While i have no studies, in my opinion this kind of distribution would also exist in many other crimes. Especially if we count organized crime in that are the biggest repeat offenders.

As I said, I believe it because it is so unsurprising.

 

[Strazdas]

We've also survived worse racism, worse corruption in politics, worse political discourse, more authoritarian regimes... but, vaguely middle eastern looking people still get horribly mistreated, our political system needs fixing, Fox news is atrocious, and our 4th amendment rights are being regularly ignored. Also, Trump is a real person who fits every one of those issues like a glove.

Im not saying we should pretend there are no issues, im just saying that we should look at the bigger perspective and evaluate the tradeoffs of pushing for a single issue a solution to which will likely cause bigger issues.

Fox news are angels compared to Gawker, Polygon, Salon, Verge, Washington Post and a whole slew of other publications.

Trump is actually a direct response to the extremism in the american left movement. It is a monster left has created. Also his evilness is blown out of proportion, especially given that the alternative - hillary - is even worse. (to be honest i think US is fucked either way).

As far as 4th amendment goes, you do realize that a lot of proposed solutions to the "rape problem" break 4th amendment?

Schools are part of society at large, so they can't have a decreased risk. Or, to explain this in my vernacular-

if A+B+C = D and D > 0 then A,B,C > 0

-is a false statement.

Given that we have no information of either A, B or C being =0

Theft is not culturally acceptable, murder is not culturally acceptable, drug trafficking is not culturally acceptable, killing police is not culturally acceptable, and human trafficking is not culturally acceptable, but various organized crime organizations got a whole lot of people to accept all of the above.

And neither of those have cultural reinforcement, except maybe drug trafficing because there sadly are cultural remnants of the "free drugs" movement.

And no, a whole lot of people do not accept all of the above.

 

[Revnak_v1legacy]

We've also survived worse racism, worse corruption in politics, worse political discourse, more authoritarian regimes... but, vaguely middle eastern looking people still get horribly mistreated, our political system needs fixing, Fox news is atrocious, and our 4th amendment rights are being regularly ignored. Also, Trump is a real person who fits every one of those issues like a glove.

Im not saying we should pretend there are no issues, im just saying that we should look at the bigger perspective and evaluate the tradeoffs of pushing for a single issue a solution to which will likely cause bigger issues.

Fox news are angels compared to Gawker, Polygon, Salon, Verge, Washington Post and a whole slew of other publications.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Extremely sorry. Could not be sorrier.

And what solution are you opposing again? Oh right, education. Just getting information out there. How huge of a problem that'll be.

Trump is actually a direct response to the extremism in the american left movement. It is a monster left has created. Also his evilness is blown out of proportion, especially given that the alternative - hillary - is even worse. (to be honest i think US is fucked either way).

Yeah, because the last eight years of American politics have seen such a huge shift left. Oh wait, no, they've been defined by a radically right-wing do nothing congress. Trump is a response to a broken political system and a news media that's straight fucked to hell. Further, while I loathe Hilary and have at best a limited desire to vote for her, she appears to at least understand that lying, blundering, and corrupting the political system are bad things she is supposed to hide. With Trump, no dice.

As far as 4th amendment goes, you do realize that a lot of proposed solutions to the "rape problem" break 4th amendment?

Which I universally oppose.

Schools are part of society at large, so they can't have a decreased risk. Or, to explain this in my vernacular-

if A+B+C = D and D > 0 then A,B,C > 0

-is a false statement.

Given that we have no information of either A, B or C being =0

Oh dear lord, if I had a professor that would accept that answer...

You have to prove statements like that. You made a claim at me. Actually defend it. Don't just say, "oh, but maybe..." Reasonable assumptions have actual evidence, not a couple cases where it works out. That's just not how logic works.

Theft is not culturally acceptable, murder is not culturally acceptable, drug trafficking is not culturally acceptable, killing police is not culturally acceptable, and human trafficking is not culturally acceptable, but various organized crime organizations got a whole lot of people to accept all of the above.

And neither of those have cultural reinforcement, except maybe drug trafficing because there sadly are cultural remnants of the "free drugs" movement.

And no, a whole lot of people do not accept all of the above.

What? Oh, you missed I was talking about subcultures. Ok. I generally don't clarify because the difference is... Well, there isn't one really. It's really empty semantics that's just a bit easier to understand. Actually, I really don't know how you misunderstood me given you accepted my use of the term in relation to the culture of particular frats earlier. Odd.

The subculture of the mob reinforced those ideas, like the subculture of different frats could or could not reinforce sexual assault.

 

[Strazdas]

I'm sorry you feel that way. Extremely sorry. Could not be sorrier.

And what solution are you opposing again? Oh right, education. Just getting information out there. How huge of a problem that'll be.

In the article you linked they are flat out saying they want to force people into a certain set of beliefs. as in literal brainwashing.

Yeah, because the last eight years of American politics have seen such a huge shift left. Oh wait, no, they've been defined by a radically right-wing do nothing congress. Trump is a response to a broken political system and a news media that's straight fucked to hell. Further, while I loathe Hilary and have at best a limited desire to vote for her, she appears to at least understand that lying, blundering, and corrupting the political system are bad things she is supposed to hide. With Trump, no dice.

What is Barrack Obama, What is gay marriage? What is feminism?

Oh dear lord, if I had a professor that would accept that answer...

You have to prove statements like that. You made a claim at me. Actually defend it. Don't just say, "oh, but maybe..." Reasonable assumptions have actual evidence, not a couple cases where it works out. That's just not how logic works.

My claim was that the chances of A > 0 is higher than chances of A < 0. Since i provided evidence and reasoning for this claim, i did defend it.

 

[irish286]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

 

[Something Amyss]

Am I supposed to be outraged when fine, upstanding Shyguys protect themselves from, I'm sorry, thugs who just want to loot our vegetable gardens to feed their slot machine habits? Yeah, right. This is PC shaming culture at its most blatant. And you're a censor, censoring me...somehow. I'll figure out how. Don't you worry about that.

Oh, don't even bring personal computers into this. That land was occupied territory and you know it!

The subculture of the mob reinforced those ideas, like the subculture of different frats could or could not reinforce sexual assault.

Just going to point out there are numerous studies available via Google Scholar which touch upon this, if you're interested. I mean, you still have to filter papers in terms of quality and repute, but this is a fairly broadly studied issue. And the findings routinely don't seem to match Strazdas' claims.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't...

Or not, given the lack of outrage when, the IFC decided to take the criticism to heart and actually do something about sexual assault.

...well, unless you count threads like this, where people seem to be outraged that an organisation that claims to take rape and sexual assault seriously decided to actually do so. I mean, technically, this is still outrage, so I guess you are "damned if you do."

 

[Smithnikov_v1legacy]

Firstly, this is National Review talking. If National Review told me the sky was blue, I'd look outside. If they told me it was going to be sunny tommorow, I'd bring an umbrella to work.

That said, if this IS true; hey Feminists. Want to know why you're having a hard time lately? Why anti female rhetoric gets so much traction? It could be because you're handing them ammunition like this, especially on college campuses. Something's got to break, folks, because the backlash is just going to get even worse than it is.

 

[JimB]

Hey feminists, want to know why you're having a hard time lately? Why anti-female rhetoric gets so much traction? It could be because you're handing them ammunition like this, especially on college campuses. Something's got to break, folks, because the backlash is just going to get even worse than it is.

I don't care who hands me a bullet; it is always, always, always my fault when I make the choice to pull a trigger.