SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Four police officers and an unknown number of civilians have been hurt in an "active shooter" incident in the US city of Colorado Springs, police say.
Officers were exchanging fire with a gunman inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, police Lt Catherine Buckley said.
It was unclear if hostages had been taken, she said.
The city's Penrose hospital said it had received six patients, but did not say whether they were civilians or police.
The situation was still active and roads were closed, the city's police said in a tweet.
"We do not have the shooter at this point but we do have all of our resources brought to bear," Lt Buckley told local TV.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
"Active Shooter" in Colorado Springs
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 107 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Economists state their GNP growth projections to the nearest tenth of a
percentage point to prove they have a sense of humor.
-- Edgar R. Fiedler
(Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 28 2015, @12:35AM
3% of the budget? Utter nonsense. Those clinics in Texas which were unable or unwilling to meet new state requirements (quite reasonable requirements, after all) for hospital admission privileges where abortions are performed? Would you have us believe that abortion is only 3% of their business? Nonsense. If the clinics ONLY LOST 3% of their business as a result of those laws, then the clinics could almost certainly have continued to operate at a profit.
Those charts are lies. Figures don't lie, but liars do figure - and they manage to make nice pretty pie charts from their lies.
The facts are, abortion is the money maker for PP. They don't make money on contraception. They don't make money on women's health issues. They don't make the money from any other services or procedures that they make off of abortion.
It MAY BE accurate to say that only 3% of "customers" make use of abortion services. If that is what was meant with that statement, then why not say it plainly? For the sake of argument, let me grant that only 3% of the people who go to PP are looking for an abortion.
However - people who visit PP for contraceptives often pay nothing out of pocket. People getting a pregnancy test often pay nothing. People with STD's often pay nothing. Abortions? $600 a pop, by most accounts that I've read.
In-Clinic Abortion Procedures at a Glance
Medical procedures that end pregnancy
Safe and effective
Available from many Planned Parenthood health centers
Costs up to $1,500 in the first trimester, but often less
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/learn/abortion/in-clinic-abortion-procedures [plannedparenthood.org]
From PP's own pages, it's obvious that federal funds are used to fund abortions - exposing another lie.
What can I expect to pay for a visit at Planned Parenthood?
This depends on the type of health care service you require and your health insurance carrier. If you do not have health insurance, we can offer you services based on our discount fee scale. Our patients find that Planned Parenthood health care fees are very reasonable, especially when compared to other doctors’ offices.
Can I use my health insurance at Planned Parenthood?
Yes! We welcome most major health insurance carriers for billing for female reproductive health services (GYN). You will be asked to present your insurance card and pay your co-pay at the time of visit. Some health insurances will require you to notify them of a change in your GYN provider. Call the health center closest to you using the health center locator at the top right of the page and speak to one of our medical staff if you need assistance.
What if I can’t pay or do not have health insurance?
Planned Parenthood participates in a federal funding program called Title X (10); a program that allows us to supplement birth control, GYN care, and other reproductive health services for women who cannot pay full price for health care services. This program does not pay for abortion care. To qualify, we ask all clients seeking services at Planned Parenthood to present the most recent four week snapshot of your income (such as recent pay stubs or, if you are unemployed, proof of your unemployment benefits or inability to work). This helps our staff determine what amount you can pay under Title X’s discounted fee scale.
Additionally, Planned Parenthood can help you sign-up for other programs that will help pay for your services including Medicaid or the Family Planning Benefit Program (FPBP). Call the health center closest to you and speak to one of our medical staff to see how you can apply.
Cash, credit card, certified check or Medicaid and/or your private insurance are the only ways to pay for abortion care at a Planned Parenthood health center in New York State.
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/planned-parenthood-central-western-new-york/patient-resources/paying-your-health-care/about-our-fees [plannedparenthood.org]
THIS IS WHERE THE MONEY IS AT!! Planned parenthood doesn't make money on distributing condoms. Planned parenthood is a wholesale homicide facility. Like any other assassin, they make their money from killing.
3% my ass. Here are some meaningful numbers:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2015/09/disentangling-the-data-on-planned-parenthood-affiliates-abortion-services-and-receipt-of-taxpayer-funding [heritage.org]
Planned Parenthood affiliates perform about 20 abortions for every prenatal care visit and about 200 abortions for every adoption referral based on the approximately 300,000 abortions they perform each year.[10]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 28 2015, @01:03AM
Did you even read what you posted, Runaway? You say "From PP's own pages, it's obvious that federal funds are used to fund abortions - exposing another lie." But the stuff you quoted says:
I know you think people don't read what you post, but that's a little over the top, don't you think?
You also say that
Planned Parenthood affiliates perform about 20 abortions for every prenatal care visit and about 200 abortions for every adoption referral based on the approximately 300,000 abortions they perform each year.
Good. Abortion is legal. Period. End of story. If busybodies like you would mind your own damn business, we'd all be a lot happier. What right do you have to decide what another person does with their body? None. I'm reminded of one of my favorite Heinlein quotes which applies in spades to you:
As I said, abortion is legal in this country. If you don't like it, move to Saudi Arabia or ISIS controlled areas. It seems like their belief systems jive pretty well with yours, except for the whole Jesus thing. Then again, they have the same (non-existent) invisible sky daddy as you do, so maybe it's not such a big deal.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Celestial on Saturday November 28 2015, @02:44AM
Slavery was legal in this country at one point. Should the people who disagreed with it have also moved to Saudi Arabia?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday November 28 2015, @03:10AM
Banning abortion is much closer to slavery than allowing it is (which increases individual liberties), because banning it violates the right to control your own body. As it is the woman's body, she has the right to evict any fetus or baby, even if doing so causes its death. I am not forced to lend out my organs to save another person's life, so I don't see why women should be forced to do so to keep a person who hasn't even been born yet alive.
(Score: 1) by Rickter on Saturday November 28 2015, @02:35PM
Not from my perspective.
Savery: The plantation owner's business interests are are given legal precidence over the slaves' right of self possession, including freedom and life.
Abortion: The mother's life choices are given legal precidence over the child's right of self possession, including life.
In your preferred interpretation, the grown ups who acted out and got pregnant made a conscious decision (at least 95% of the time since less than 5% of pregancies are the result of rape) to participate in an activity that resulted in pregnancy more closely align with the slave who had no choice in the matter than with the slave owner who chose to participate in an economic system where they may have felt they had no way to stay economically viable when they were competing against all of the other slave owners had the economic benefits of slavery. The unborn child is the powerless entity who equates more closely to the slave in the slavery-abortion comparison, because they have no say in the matter, but the parents made the choices that put them in this situation. Under your scenario, the slave is the oppressor who puts the slave owner in the situation where he has no choice but to participate in slavery.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @03:16PM
> the grown ups who acted out
Statements like that reveal you to be one of those moral avengers who think pregnancy is a punishment that people deserve as a consequence of their moral failings. You will not convince anyone who isn't already convinced that children are a punishment for the wicked.
(Score: 1) by Rickter on Saturday November 28 2015, @04:15PM
So if somebody makes a mistake, they should be allowed to kill somebody to make it better? Bullshit!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:07AM
> So if somebody makes a mistake, they should be allowed to kill somebody to make it better?
And there you reveal the flaw in your argument. A fetus is not somebody. It is the potential to be somebody.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @11:54PM
No, you blithering idiot! The point is that, unless the woman has been raped or otherwise coerced, she and her partner made decisions that got her pregnant. Pregnancy didn't just happen. Is it really too much to ask that you pro-choice folks at least educate yourselves on where babies come from?
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Saturday November 28 2015, @06:48PM
Abortion: The mother's life choices are given legal precidence over the child's right of self possession, including life.
No, the mother simply has control over her own body, and she isn't forced by government thugs to remain pregnant. You have no right to remain in someone else's body, regardless of how you got there. The death of the unborn is simply what happens when they are evicted.
In your preferred interpretation, the grown ups who acted out and got pregnant made a conscious decision (at least 95% of the time since less than 5% of pregancies are the result of rape) to participate in an activity that resulted in pregnancy
I don't care about how conscious their decision was, or how powerless the fetus/baby is. I also don't base my beliefs on a few rape cases. What I care about is the fundamental right to control your own body and nothing more. Were the baby not in the mother's body, there would be no issue here, but it is.
Under your scenario, the slave is the oppressor who puts the slave owner in the situation where he has no choice but to participate in slavery.
No, the oppressor in my scenario is the government and society.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 29 2015, @04:10AM
> The death of the unborn is simply what happens when they are evicted.
I don't think it is possible for you to be more tone-deaf.
You are both blinded by your respective ideologies and not only are you unable to hear each other, anyone who isn't a nutjob won't hear what you either of you have to say as well.
(Score: 2) by Anal Pumpernickel on Sunday November 29 2015, @05:25AM
I don't think it is possible for you to be more tone-deaf.
I know exactly what I'm doing, what I'm saying, and what effects it will likely have.
You are both blinded by your respective ideologies and not only are you unable to hear each other, anyone who isn't a nutjob won't hear what you either of you have to say as well.
So 'sorry' for (presumably) taking a position you don't agree with.
Actually, since you don't agree with me, you must be blinded by ideology. You can't possibly have any genuine opinions of your own, so you must be blind. Anyone who isn't a nutjob won't listen to your smug content-less drivel. Most likely, you will be "unable to hear" me. I'm the Voice of Reason, after all; you may have thought that was you, but it's actually me. Now, crawl back into your tone-deaf bubble world; it's a fitting place for you closed-minded ACs.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 28 2015, @04:21AM
Slavery was legal in this country at one point. Should the people who disagreed with it have also moved to Saudi Arabia?
It's not a very good analogy (as Anal Pumpernickel pointed out [soylentnews.org])
Even so, Saudi Arabia didn't exist back then, but in principle, yes.
An alternative would be (as was done WRT slavery) to amend the constitution. It only takes approval by both houses of Congress and ratification by two thirds of state legislatures.
And before you get on to the Civil War, I'd note that the Confederate states (those who supported slavery -- which was, as you pointed out, legal) struck first (Fort Sumter [wikipedia.org]) and seceded from the U.S. while slavery was still the law of the land.
The Thirteenth Amendment [wikipedia.org] abolishing slavery in the U.S. was not ratified until eight months *after* the Civil War ended.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 28 2015, @04:24AM
"This program does not pay for abortion care. [emphasis added]"
And, the fact remains, without those federal funds, PP would have to bar the doors on all of their clinics. Those funds INDIRECTLY fund abortions. I don't give a rip how imaginatively the accountants move the funds around, federal funds provide abortions.
"Good. Abortion is legal. Period. End of story."
Keep telling yourself that. There are abortion cases in the courts now. Remember Doctor Kermit? Maybe you should visit him in prison, and reassure him that abortions are legal.
"If you don't like it, move to Saudi Arabia or ISIS controlled areas."
Don't quit your day job - you're not going to make it as a comedian.
The ONLY difference between abortion and infanticide is a breath. One single breath. If the child is given the opportunity to draw one breath, then that child can and will scream when you stab a syringe into the back of his neck, to suck his brains out. One breath.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 28 2015, @04:43AM
The ONLY difference between abortion and infanticide is a breath. One single breath. If the child is given the opportunity to draw one breath, then that child can and will scream when you stab a syringe into the back of his neck, to suck his brains out. One breath.
Not so much. I invite you to educate yourself [wikipedia.org] (if you can open your mind enough to do so). From the link provided:
And even if you are a fanatic [brainyquote.com] and have all this love for these unborn children, how many children whose parents can't take care of them and/or live in places where they are forced to carry children to term have you brought into your home, adopted and raised as your own? If the answer isn't more than zero, you can't really care all that much, can you?
And since a large number of pregnancies end in miscarriage (that is, an abortion) without any intervention, should we prosecute everyone who has a miscarriage?
If you think termination of pregnancy is wrong, more power to you. If that's the case, I strongly recommend that you don't terminate your pregnancies. Beyond that, you have no right or moral authority to tell anyone else what they should or shouldn't do with their own bodies.
As I pointed out here and in a previous post, if you feel that strongly, adopt unwanted children and campaign for a constitutional amendment to outlaw abortion. Otherwise, keep your nose out of other people's uteri.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 28 2015, @05:01AM
"Abortion is the ending of pregnancy by removing a fetus or embryo from the womb before it can survive on its own."
That definitions is far to simplistic. It was intentionally made simplistic to disguise the suffering involved in an abortion. Those babies, especially late term babies, SUFFER PAIN. As I said, a single breath separates a "fetus" from an "infant".
The rest of your post is meant to be taken seriously? It's better to be murdered, than to grow up poor, or unwanted? The fact that I can't adopt a million babies makes me a hypocrite for opposing abortion? Really?
I'll make a deal with you. I'll keep my nose out of other people's uteri, when those other people stop taking tax money to fund their abortion centers. No matter how many accounting games are played with PP's money, the fact remains that PP would go under without federal funding.
Planned parenthood and the prison industry are pretty equal as near as I can see. One kills babies, the other imprisons people for profit.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 28 2015, @06:32AM
I would just say that we should agree to disagree, but your way would inflict suffering on millions. I can't abide that.
That definitions is far to simplistic. It was intentionally made simplistic to disguise the suffering involved in an abortion. Those babies, especially late term babies, SUFFER PAIN. As I said, a single breath separates a "fetus" from an "infant".
Fine. Kill the babies! Rip their heads off. gnaw on their tasty little bones. Hooray!
The rest of your post is meant to be taken seriously? It's better to be murdered, than to grow up poor, or unwanted? The fact that I can't adopt a million babies makes me a hypocrite for opposing abortion? Really?
Yes, quite. Not even one, huh? You obviously only care about your political ideology and don't give a rat's ass about the suffering of children. I bet you support the death penalty too. That's hypocritical.
I'll make a deal with you. I'll keep my nose out of other people's uteri, when those other people stop taking tax money to fund their abortion centers. No matter how many accounting games are played with PP's money, the fact remains that PP would go under without federal funding.
No deal. The Federal government should be funding *all* forms of family planning *including* abortion. It's dinosaurs like you in Congress who exult in the suffering of countless women. it's disgusting.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 28 2015, @05:20AM
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/02/11/pro-choicers-heres-why-you-cannot-support-abortion-while-opposing-puppy-murder/ [themattwalshblog.com]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Saturday November 28 2015, @06:43AM
http://themattwalshblog.com/2014/02/11/pro-choicers-heres-why-you-cannot-support-abortion-while-opposing-puppy-murder/
What a bunch of bullshit.
Fetuses are not "innocent humans". Fetuses are *developing* life forms, completely dependent on the sentient person gestating it.
If that sentient being does not wish to carry that fetus, it has the right to have it removed. Period. I don't have a uterus, so I have no say in that, ever.
Even if I did, the only uterus I'd have control over would be my own.
If you don't like that state of affairs, perhaps you should go somewhere where women are treated as property. Each woman makes her own choices and doesn't need you or anyone else making them for her.
I'm not going to change your mind and your irrational, paternalistic drivel isn't going to change mine.
In reading your posts and interacting with you here, you're obviously reasonably intelligent and, for the most part, seem to be a decent human being -- but not this. On this issue you're flat wrong and because of people like you, millions of women suffer needlessly. Shame on you!
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday November 28 2015, @07:01AM
No woman has a "right" to demand that I pay for her abortion. Tax money supports Planned Parenthood. Without tax money, Planned Parenthood would close most, if not all, of it's clinics. A woman may decide to do whatever she wishes with her body, but she can do it at her own expense. It's really that simple.
Defund Planned Parenthood, and properly enforce the law that says no federal funds will be spent on abortion, and I'll be a whole lot happier.
I do note that you stipulate a right to govern her body. Getting an abortion is seldom a health issue. If and when it does become a genuine health issue, that is, pregnancy seriously threatens the mother's life, then I am willing to subsidize whichever procedure(s) are necessary to save her life.
I have performed triage. I understand the necessity to decide who survives sometimes. In an instance where either the baby or the mother survives, then the mother takes priority - UNLESS the mother herself says differently.
You might want to read my most recent journal entry. I went in search of a blog that I read a decade ago, couldn't find it, so dredged up my re-posting of that blog. There's another that I'm searching for . . .
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @07:46AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @08:51PM
THIS, plus I am sure he is perfectly fine with his tax dollars going towards purchasing all those bullets and missiles and bombs with the potential to kill every baby on this planet 20 times over. What a self-righteous hypocrite.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday November 28 2015, @02:05PM
No problem: your tax gets spent on various pork barrels. It's the entire NotSanguine's tax that is used for PP.
Happy now?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 28 2015, @07:40AM