The first usage was January 1842 by William E. Clarke, not 1846 by W.T.G. Morton, and there was yet another one that March by Crawford W. Long for a tumor removal. Morton was of course still one of the pioneers of ether as an anaesthetic.

Hiiiiiii.

V

!godot@programming.dev

Veganism. I went vegetarian and stayed there for a long time, and I assumed taking the extra step to being vegan would be too difficult relative to what I thought at the time was a marginal benefit. A couple years back, I watched the documentary Dominion (NSFL) and realized pretty quickly that I’d been mistaken. Of course it was more than just Dominion, but it’s such an acutely traumatizing kick in the teeth that it was definitely the last straw.

Congress needs to give the FDA the power to regulate supplements goddamn yesterday.

The “good guy with a gun” trope in US gun control discourse is based strictly around a civilian who carries a firearm with them, not police or security whose job it is to carry a firearm and keep people safe. That’s 12/433 people, not 28%. 15/433 at most if you count the off-duty cops.

When people talk about “good guys with guns” to stop mass shootings, it’s a bullshit way of deflecting from the actual problem, instead going in the opposite direction of the solution by saying even more civilians should be armed.

The Aelia Capitolina PD were fucking loose cannons, man.

Ah, the classic no true good guy fallacy.

Yeah, so terrible and confusing that they didn’t mention guns in branches that don’t have anything to do with guns outside of a gun fetishist’s fanfiction.

I think you’re pissed at the objective fact that 12/433 is fucking nothing and your “good guy with a gun” argument is a pathetic farce, so you’re trying muddy the waters by shifting the argument to a ridiculous, unfounded, unfalsifiable notion that any of the 42 subduers might’ve had literally anything to do with “good guys” having firearms.

Oh yeah, I’m sure any of these cases were someone stopping to hold an active shooter at gunpoint and that somehow working out for them. Or maybe they used their gun as a melee weapon. Or maybe the attackers were subdued by being talked down over their common love of guns. Or maybe the active shooter ran out of ammo and came up to the good guy with a gun to get some more, at which point the good guy revealed they were actually tricking them into lowering their guard and put them into a headlock. Or maybe some other far-fetched bullshit that’ll let me equivocate over the fact that “good guys with guns” don’t do shit in the grand scheme of things.

“Shooter is down. Three clean shots to the chest. Johnson, put 95 more in him, and we can all go home.”

And for that 2%, you get:

• More people armed with and randomly carrying around guns which, you know, causes the problem.
• A potential to catch civilians in the crossfire while not actually taking down the shooter.
• Muddying who and where the attacker is (and how many attackers there are) for both police, security, and fleeing civilians who need to make panicked, split-second decisions.

Okay, so I’m not the only one who read “shot the attacker 98 times” and for a split second imagined this scenario where 131 times, the attacker was shot a gratuitous and strangely precise number of times, right?

real world hobbits

!lordoftherings@lemmy.world is that way.

The interpretation in the rest of this thread is that this man is being a sexist, condescending douchebag to his peers. I hope “overly enthusiastic about your favorite subjects” is better than that.

I choose to believe the more wholesome version that this is their gay, autistic, and genuinely endearing friend who got started on his special interest without realizing that nobody else cared, and his friends otherwise like him enough that they’re trying to figure out how to move the conversation forward without hurting his feelings after they all lost interest minutes ago.

“So during Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, Spock is passing through decks in the Enterprise, and we see one called Deck 78. Now you see, this class of Enterprise only has 23 decks, and so unless we assume someone misnamed this deck, how did this one get here? Some fans have speculated that maybe maybe Q put it there as a practical joke to confuse the audience, but why would Q use the number 78 specifically? This could be a reference to the episode All Our Yesterdays in The Original Series which is production code 78. In this episode, Spock reverts to being emotional like his primitive ancestors after traveling back through time, and this could be hinting to the idea that he secretly feels emotions for his half-brother Sybok who’s the antagonist of the movie.”

Here you go.

If it looks like a duck

And it swims like a duck

And it quacks like a duck

Then it’s probably the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.