Posted on June 19 at 10:46 a.m.
Why is this in the paper? Oh yeah, cause the summer paper is run by a pack of mindless twits. I still wish I hadn't read the "drunk dialing top 5" or could just brain-bleach it away.
My eyes. The goggles do nothing.
Posted on May 8 at 12:21 p.m.
Again, tasers. They aren't even a cause of death anymore!
Posted on May 8 at 12:21 p.m.
If they were really commodities, you'd be able to own more than one at a time...
Concubines, anyone?
Posted on May 6 at 12:22 p.m.
way to toss out "suicide" in the beginning of the article and then never back that up. nice fail.
Posted on May 1 at 8:52 a.m.
I still say tasers are the answer, for anyone who cares. Immobilize, disarm, restrain.
Posted on April 28 at 3:11 p.m.
I think it'd be better if people simply took advantage of the weapons they are allowed to carry on campus instead of worrying too much about not being allowed to carry guns.
Blowguns. Tasers. Truncheons. Cattle prods.
All kinds of things you can use for the sort of situation in which you might be found if someone carries handguns with the aim to use them.
In fact, let's issue one pink taser to each girl on campus, paid for out of fees. That way, birds get protection from rape, and I get protection from nutters with guns. These girls also have accountability, because of the tags released with every taser shot, which would also be tracked by the university. Hell, let's take it out of the athletics department instead of raising fees!
Deal?
Posted on April 24 at 9:15 a.m.
I agree. Deadly force is bad. But you don't have to kill someone with a weapon. A taser normally doesn't kill.
Someone with a gun can shoot someone else (or himself or herself for that matter) in the leg or arm or foot. Even better, someone with a weapon could simply not need to use it (I like this one best) but the idea that everyone should have to wait until someone who has a gun gets there in the event of an emergency doesn't make a lot of sense. Even if just a small number of people even bothered to arm themselves (and it would be a small number of people) the probability of not having to wait for cops to save you would be much better. Of course, if this small number of people was armed, the odds are better that someone wouldn't even try any sort of attack.
Personally, I'm not big on firearms, but I'm also not big on putting my life exclusively in the hands of the police.
Posted on June 19 at 10:48 a.m.
You should get out more, try to meet more urologists.
Hack.
On Jayhawk Dirty Talk