Nerds. Nerds EVERYWHERE...

#131

JacquesCuze wrote:
jugheadnaut wrote: Just an un-serious callback to your earlier expressed positions on race. If you don't believe anything approximating "any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role", then I retract.
I don't think anything I've ever said could possibly be construed as

"any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role"

I am not sure what you think my earlier expressed positions on race are. But it seems that you are way off.

So anyway, District 13 has this sleek, fast hovercraft thingie built like a Camaro. There's like nine shots of the damn thing taking off as the gear retract, then landing as the gear descend, then taking off again as the gear retract. All to drop Katniss onto YA patch of rubble to bawl and drip snot out her cute little nose. A certain ex-music-video director must've remembered his NYU film instructor saying, 'if you want to inject a sense of action in a lifeless film, show a moving train.'

#132

What the hell? Doesn't Fry know that you're supposed to take off work and stay in bed for a year?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 43988.html

#133

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
So anyway, District 13 has this sleek, fast hovercraft thingie built like a Camaro. There's like nine shots of the damn thing taking off as the gear retract, then landing as the gear descend, then taking off again as the gear retract. All to drop Katniss onto YA patch of rubble to bawl and drip snot out her cute little nose. A certain ex-music-video director must've remembered his NYU film instructor saying, 'if you want to inject a sense of action in a lifeless film, show a moving train.'

Oh! So THAT'S why Blizzard made Grimrail Depot!

[youtube]oXmVvtbjBi0[/youtube]

That mansplains everything.

#134

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
JacquesCuze wrote:
jugheadnaut wrote: Just an un-serious callback to your earlier expressed positions on race. If you don't believe anything approximating "any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role", then I retract.
I don't think anything I've ever said could possibly be construed as

"any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role"

I am not sure what you think my earlier expressed positions on race are. But it seems that you are way off.
So anyway, District 13 has this sleek, fast hovercraft thingie built like a Camaro. There's like nine shots of the damn thing taking off as the gear retract, then landing as the gear descend, then taking off again as the gear retract. All to drop Katniss onto YA patch of rubble to bawl and drip snot out her cute little nose. A certain ex-music-video director must've remembered his NYU film instructor saying, 'if you want to inject a sense of action in a lifeless film, show a moving train.'

Moving trains are phallic symbols of teh patriarchy, shitlord!

#135

Grimrail Depot Dungeon teaches boys to rape.

Ban Blizzard!!!!

#136

another lurker wrote:Grimrail Depot Dungeon teaches boys to rape.

Ban Blizzard!!!!

Shh! If they get to know what Blizzard did to the characters of Jaina and Silvanas, they might as well go ahead and try it.

#137

JacquesCuze wrote:
jugheadnaut wrote: Just an un-serious callback to your earlier expressed positions on race. If you don't believe anything approximating "any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role", then I retract.
I don't think anything I've ever said could possibly be construed as

"any time a white man shoots a black man, racism must play a major role"

I am not sure what you think my earlier expressed positions on race are. But it seems that you are way off.

I was extrapolating, as the previous context had nothing to do with shootings. You did seem to believe as a general rule that if there's a negative encounter between a white cop and a black person, racism was likely in play. IIRC, you had some other essentialist views on race as well, including believing in the 'whitesplaining' concept. But as I said, my statement in this case was meant to be jokey and I retract.

I'm not bringing this up to resurrect a debate on race with you, as I stand by my previous conclusion that I found this completely unproductive. However, if you believe I'm entirely off base, I'll dig up some of your statements.

#138

I just want to tell everyone I am sorry. I should have never engaged in the the whole Zimmerman thing. I see now that it was completely pointless to do so. First because at least in this matter many people here, such as Matt Cavanaugh, are not acting like skeptics, they are acting like ideologies. While I lurked for a long time I missed this little drama the first time it played out. I understand that many people have me on ignore for my fucking with of what's his name but people, again Matt being the main on in my mind, have replied to me before so I don't think that is excuse for this. No, I am troublesome because I am largely neutral on the matter seeing that Zimmerman was within his right to defend himself but also of the opinion that he is a douche bag whose actions lead to the death of a teenager. This obviously just has to be ignored because at least on this issue, Matt and others, need a simple hero/villain narrative.

Anyway I am more disappointed in myself that anyone here.

#139

comhcinc wrote:I just want to tell everyone I am sorry. I should have never engaged in the the whole Zimmerman thing. I see now that it was completely pointless to do so. First because at least in this matter many people here, such as Matt Cavanaugh, are not acting like skeptics, they are acting like ideologies. While I lurked for a long time I missed this little drama the first time it played out. I understand that many people have me on ignore for my fucking with of what's his name but people, again Matt being the main on in my mind, have replied to me before so I don't think that is excuse for this. No, I am troublesome because I am largely neutral on the matter seeing that Zimmerman was within his right to defend himself but also of the opinion that he is a douche bag whose actions lead to the death of a teenager. This obviously just has to be ignored because at least on this issue, Matt and others, need a simple hero/villain narrative.

Anyway I am more disappointed in myself that anyone here.

More cocks, less talks.

#140

feathers wrote:
James Caruthers wrote:
feathers wrote:Inbetween them, AndrewV69, John D and Bovarchist argue that the police can neither manage to stay in possession of their firearms, nor reliably use them if they do, without killing their opponent.

Which seems a good argument why police should not be equipped with firearms.
I hate to be rude, but might I inquire how much firearms training you have had and what you know about close-quarters combat?
Absolutely none and nothing, and I don't seem to recall ever having made a suggestion to that extent. And it would nary be necessary, as I have been tutored by such fine commando experts as you and the aforementioned gentlemen.

From which one can draw the conclusion, once more, that policemen in America, when confronted with resistance, can only resort to their gun. As this instrument could be wrested from them, it is imperative they hold it and start emptying the magazine until the subject remains motionless.

Which is fine, I don't have to live in that hellhole, but I hope your children don't have a run-in with the police, ever. Unless you're experts at coffin carpentry, too.

Haters gonna hate.

It is actually quite nice here. If you are a little bit careful you are likely to have a safe and happy life. We don't fear the cops (this includes my black future-son-in-law). We don't get shot at and robbed all the time. We mostly leave each other to do their own business and we have a right to say what we want.

Funny how everyone rags on the US even when they don't know shit about it.

I think it is partly driven by jealously. haha.

#141

Anyway we need more ponies.

http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2014/ ... 86939k.png

#142

another lurker wrote:
More cocks, less talks.

This is picture I sent my wife last week.

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_EmX ... -11-21.png

#143

comhcinc wrote:I just want to tell everyone I am sorry. I should have never engaged in the the whole Zimmerman thing. I see now that it was completely pointless to do so. First because at least in this matter many people here, such as Matt Cavanaugh, are not acting like skeptics, they are acting like ideologies. While I lurked for a long time I missed this little drama the first time it played out. I understand that many people have me on ignore for my fucking with of what's his name but people, again Matt being the main on in my mind, have replied to me before so I don't think that is excuse for this. No, I am troublesome because I am largely neutral on the matter seeing that Zimmerman was within his right to defend himself but also of the opinion that he is a douche bag whose actions lead to the death of a teenager. This obviously just has to be ignored because at least on this issue, Matt and others, need a simple hero/villain narrative.

Anyway I am more disappointed in myself that anyone here.

Has it occurred to you that you see Zimmerman as a douchebag because that's the narrative the media chose? Very few of us are so saintly that we couldn't be painted as douchebags.

What I'll grant about Zimmerman is that he gets off on the idea of being a hero. I can think of worse things to get off on.

PS I don't think one has to be a hyperskeptic to point out that if police chose not to press charges against Zimmerman for assaulting a cop, then it's pretty obvious that it was a bullshit charge. Cops don't let stuff like that slide (as we've recently been reminded).

#144

comhcinc wrote:
another lurker wrote: More cocks, less talks.
This is picture I sent my wife last week.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-_EmX ... -11-21.png

Is it a real Foshaug? No can't be, I smiled.

#145

bovarchist wrote:
Has it occurred to you that you see Zimmerman as a douchebag because that's the narrative the media chose?

That is possible, but he has done a great job by himself convincing me. He is a douche bag.

But let's move on because recent history proves we are not going to get anywhere with this.

#146

I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.

#147

another lurker wrote:I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.

We comment back and forth on Google Hangout and it allows you to draw pictures and even add to each other's pictures. The amount of cocks that we draw is remarkable.

http://i.imgur.com/SsdDpNW.png

#148

As penance for my sins I am going to take Nec off of ignore.

#149

comhcinc wrote:
another lurker wrote:I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.
We comment back and forth on Google Hangout and it allows you to draw pictures and even add to each other's pictures. The amount of cocks that we draw is remarkable.

http://i.imgur.com/SsdDpNW.png

The international language of love.

#150

comhcinc wrote:I just want to tell everyone I am sorry. I should have never engaged in the the whole Zimmerman thing. I see now that it was completely pointless to do so. First because at least in this matter many people here, such as Matt Cavanaugh, are not acting like skeptics, they are acting like ideologies. While I lurked for a long time I missed this little drama the first time it played out. I understand that many people have me on ignore for my fucking with of what's his name but people, again Matt being the main on in my mind, have replied to me before so I don't think that is excuse for this. No, I am troublesome because I am largely neutral on the matter seeing that Zimmerman was within his right to defend himself but also of the opinion that he is a douche bag whose actions lead to the death of a teenager. This obviously just has to be ignored because at least on this issue, Matt and others, need a simple hero/villain narrative.

Anyway I am more disappointed in myself that anyone here.

Other than the fact that this rehashing bored a lot of people, there's nothing to feel bad about and nothing to apologize for. It was a debate, and for the most part a civil one. Some minds may have been changed ever so slightly, which is usually the most you can hope for, but mostly not.

However, you're confusing coming to a strongly held conclusion based on the evidence with being an ideologue. Skepticism doesn't mean one must find some middle ground. Skepticism has to do with being completely open to the evidence, which not just allows for but implies that you should draw conclusions if that's where the evidence takes you. Of course, skepticism also means you continue to be open to the evidence even after you are confident of a conclusion. Do you have any grounds to believe Matt or I or anyone else arguing the Zimmerman case didn't reach their conclusions based on evidence and wouldn't be open to additional evidence?

P.S. I know there may be no way to answer that in detail without rehashing things again, which no one wants.

#151

another lurker wrote:I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.

Then, get a PR job at ESA. Go go go!

#152

Did you know Martin Luther King Jr. was in favor of rioting and looting?
And ChasCPeterson is a racist troll?
http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... d-mlk-say/

#153

comhcinc wrote:
another lurker wrote:I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.
We comment back and forth on Google Hangout and it allows you to draw pictures and even add to each other's pictures. The amount of cocks that we draw is remarkable.

http://i.imgur.com/SsdDpNW.png

Ach so. Wollen Sie darÃ¼ber reden?

#154

another lurker wrote: Moving trains are phallic symbols of teh patriarchy, shitlord!

Pix of your caboose, or fuck off.
:cdc:

#155

jugheadnaut wrote: Do you have any grounds to believe Matt or I or anyone else arguing the Zimmerman case didn't reach their conclusions based on evidence and wouldn't be open to additional evidence?

P.S. I know there may be no way to answer that in detail without rehashing things again, which no one wants.

I can point to something Matt has said over and over again that illustrates my point.(Oh and just for the record I wasn't thinking about you when I made that post. I am not afraid to call out names. James was another one that I was thinking about).

Matt has stated many times that Martin was a thief or a burglar. He states it as if it is a fact. It's not a fact. Martin was never charged much less convinced of that crime. Matt is taking the fact that Martin was caught with a screwdriver and what appears to be stolen jewelry in school and then assuming he was a thief. Without a trial, without even being charged. If the pit does anything we ask that before we start calling someone a criminal the person needs to be convicted much less charged. Now when I first saw Matt do that I made the comment (that I stand by) that he is a smart guy and knows what he is doing.

That might not be actually answering your question but that is what I mean that Matt is acting like an ideologue.

#156

another lurker wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
another lurker wrote:I want, someday, to make a gorgeous, ladylike, couture level dress, and cover it with a print of crudely drawn cocks.
We comment back and forth on Google Hangout and it allows you to draw pictures and even add to each other's pictures. The amount of cocks that we draw is remarkable.

http://i.imgur.com/SsdDpNW.png

The international language of love.

I have been trying to get my wife to post here. I think she would blow a lot of people's minds. She shares a lot of the characteristics of a SJW without there being a nut bag.

#157

bovarchist wrote:
comhcinc wrote:I just want to tell everyone I am sorry. I should have never engaged in the the whole Zimmerman thing. I see now that it was completely pointless to do so. First because at least in this matter many people here, such as Matt Cavanaugh, are not acting like skeptics, they are acting like ideologies. While I lurked for a long time I missed this little drama the first time it played out. I understand that many people have me on ignore for my fucking with of what's his name but people, again Matt being the main on in my mind, have replied to me before so I don't think that is excuse for this. No, I am troublesome because I am largely neutral on the matter seeing that Zimmerman was within his right to defend himself but also of the opinion that he is a douche bag whose actions lead to the death of a teenager. This obviously just has to be ignored because at least on this issue, Matt and others, need a simple hero/villain narrative.

Anyway I am more disappointed in myself that anyone here.
Has it occurred to you that you see Zimmerman as a douchebag because that's the narrative the media chose? Very few of us are so saintly that we couldn't be painted as douchebags.

What I'll grant about Zimmerman is that he gets off on the idea of being a hero. I can think of worse things to get off on.

PS I don't think one has to be a hyperskeptic to point out that if police chose not to press charges against Zimmerman for assaulting a cop, then it's pretty obvious that it was a bullshit charge. Cops don't let stuff like that slide (as we've recently been reminded).

A "simple hero/villain narrative" is mos def not what I need or want. I'm interested in the rule of law, and how it must be upheld to protect all our civil liberties. Com, read my views on the case here:
http://trueliberalnexus.wordpress.com/2 ... n-verdict/

Tell me what you think ... over there.

Anyway, my GF told me Liam Hensworth used to date Miley Cyrus. Now he and The Goddess Jennifer are an item. They probably started fooling around to relieve the boredom of appearing in that Merchant-Ivory production, Mockingjay I.

#158

comhcinc wrote:
bovarchist wrote:
Has it occurred to you that you see Zimmerman as a douchebag because that's the narrative the media chose?
That is possible, but he has done a great job by himself convincing me. He is a douche bag.

But let's move on because recent history proves we are not going to get anywhere with this.

He may be a douchebag, but being a douchebag isn't a crime (otherwise we'd all end up in prison sooner or later, some more times than others). Many other people use their fame to get rich, he's simply jumping on the bandwagon. I don't that anyone, including Matt Cavanaugh, thinks that he is a hero of the people. I just think that according to the evidence we can't say that he's guilty of any crime and that in my humble opinion in that specific event he acted morally.

I'm not saying that Martin was a horrible person, too. I'm simply saying that the evidence seems to suggest beyond any reasonable doubt that he was the one who started the fight, and he was legally and (in my humble opinion) morally responsible for his own death.

Maybe Martin could have become a hero, or even a saint, and maybe Zimmerman is a selfish prick. The law, and the version of circumstantial morals to which I adhere, aren't concerned with the personal character of the individuals involved in a specific event, but only with their actions that led to the specific event.

#159

Kirbmarc wrote: He may be a douchebag, but being a douchebag isn't a crime (otherwise we'd all end up in prison sooner or later, some more times than others).

I agree and I have stated time and again that I don't think he is guilty of a crime. I do think (and here we disagree) that he is morally responsible for the death of a teenager.

#160

Zimmerman debate as a picture.

http://i.imgur.com/ZvXb6b8.jpg

#161

John D wrote:It is actually quite nice here. If you are a little bit careful you are likely to have a safe and happy life. We don't fear the cops (this includes my black future-son-in-law). We don't get shot at and robbed all the time.
(...)
I think it is partly driven by jealously. haha.

Well, your coffins are surely bigger and better than ours, what with all the experience.

Seriously, I don't think the USA is that bad and I will happily drop it if you lot drop the weird charge that I'm pretending to be a combat/self-defence/weapons expert, which I emphatically did not claim. Instead, I've taken your explanations for granted and used them against you (one could say I've taken your gun and... oh well).

What stays is the essence: a teenage boy was killed for stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse. Your unspoken assertion seems to be: if you resist arrest, you get killed, can't possibly be prevented, next. If that is your persuasion, I rest my case.

Personally I find that rather cynical. This is a tragic event no matter who is at fault. For sure the police meet with resistance all the time? Do all the apprehended get killed? Is there really no other method than shoot-to-kill to resolve a situation with a reluctant person?

#162

[quote] I do think (and here we disagree) that he is morally responsible for the death of a teenager.[/quote

Fair enough. We can agree to disagree, and neither of our positions is necessarily better than the other. We probably based our view of morality on different assumptions. In my humble opinion people, even teenagers, are fully morally responsible for their actions unless they've been deceived or coerced by others. Nothing from the evidence we have suggests that Zimmerman deceived or coerced Martin into doing anything. Martin seems to have chosen to attack Zimmerman on his own.

I also believe that people, even teenagers, who are able to understand the consequences of their actions should also be able to pick the appropriate response to a perceived threat. If, as the evidence seems to show, all Zimmerman did was following Martin around, the level of the perceived threat wasn't enough to justify what the evidence suggests to have been Martin's attack on Zimmerman.

I'm open to change my mind if new evidence suggests that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation, or raised the level of the perceived threat in a way that would justify Martin's attack (for example if he aimed his weapon at Martin) or deceived or coerced Martin into doing what he did-

The idea that Zimmerman should have taken into account that Martin was a hormonal teenager who was raised in a culture that encourages violence is, in my humble opinion, an unnecessary requirement. Zimmerman didn't know Martin's character. For all he knew Martin could have been a more cool-headed, reasonable person who didn't see the need to retaliate and would have fled the scene or simply addressed him personally instead of attacking him. Zimmerman had no moral obligation to speculate about the possible unreasonable reaction of a stranger.

#163

comhcinc wrote: Matt has stated many times that Martin was a thief or a burglar. He states it as if it is a fact. It's not a fact. Martin was never charged much less convinced of that crime. Matt is taking the fact that Martin was caught with a screwdriver and what appears to be stolen jewelry in school and then assuming he was a thief.

I was a bit taken aback by that, too. But I know Matt has a penchant for intentional polemic overstatement, and I view things he says in this light.

comhcinc wrote: Without a trial, without even being charged. If the pit does anything we ask that before we start calling someone a criminal the person needs to be convicted much less charged. Now when I first saw Matt do that I made the comment (that I stand by) that he is a smart guy and knows what he is doing.

Here you're just wrong, and demonstrably so. Your friend admits to you that he robbed a store last night. He's never charged. Are you wrong to call him a thief? Being charged with a crime is not a necessary condition to assert with confidence that someone has committed a crime. If there's sufficient evidence for it, it's perfectly appropriate. I've noticed a common misperception about the presumption of innocence. Many seem to believe it implies some kind of civic duty to not have the opinion that someone is guilty of a crime until convicted. It's not that at all. Presumption of innocence is solely a legal standard. An individual has both the legal and ethical right to reasonably conclude that someone is guilty of a crime even in the complete absence of a legal proceeding.

#164

comhcinc wrote:
I have been trying to get my wife to post here. I think she would blow a lot of people's minds

Always a delicate question ......

But would there be an, a'hem, cost involved?

#165

What stays is the essence: a teenage boy was killed for stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse. Your unspoken assertion seems to be: if you resist arrest, you get killed, can't possibly be prevented, next. If that is your persuasion, I rest my case.

Personally I find that rather cynical. This is a tragic event no matter who is at fault. For sure the police meet with resistance all the time? Do all the apprehended get killed? Is there really no other method than shoot-to-kill to resolve a situation with a reluctant person?

The death is no doubt tragic, but the teenage boy (who was a legal adult anyway) wasn't "killed for stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse". If Darren Wilson's story is true Brown's death was the result of his actions which established him as a possible threat to Wilson's life. He didn't simply" resist arrest", he wrestled with Wilson for Wilson's gun, could have potentially shot him, and when ordered to stop seemed to about to charge Wilson with the intent of overpowering him.

Brown, at least according to Wilson's story (which seems to be supported by the forensic evidence), wasn't simply "reluctant". He was a threat Wilson's life.

#166

Personally I think Rodney King had it coming. Bastard just didn't know when to stop trying to get up from the ground.

Discuss.

#167

bovarchist wrote:PS I don't think one has to be a hyperskeptic to point out that if police chose not to press charges against Zimmerman for assaulting a cop, then it's pretty obvious that it was a bullshit charge. Cops don't let stuff like that slide (as we've recently been reminded).

Assuming you are talking about Zimmeran's prior arrest for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, it's not true that they chose not to press charges because they thought it was a bullshit charge.

What actually happened was that Zimmerman was able to avail himself of a first-time offender diversion program, which he completed. This included anger management classes and community service. The charges were reduced and eventually dropped only because (and after) he went through that first-time offender program.

You can verify all of this for yourself through the Orange County Clerk of the Courts website, as the records and public and accesible at no cost. Search by name for Zimmerman, George and you should find the record for this incident, plus a prior injunction for domestic violence.

http://myclerk.myorangeclerk.com/

#168

feathers wrote:
John D wrote:It is actually quite nice here. If you are a little bit careful you are likely to have a safe and happy life. We don't fear the cops (this includes my black future-son-in-law). We don't get shot at and robbed all the time.
(...)
I think it is partly driven by jealously. haha.
Well, your coffins are surely bigger and better than ours, what with all the experience.

Seriously, I don't think the USA is that bad and I will happily drop it if you lot drop the weird charge that I'm pretending to be a combat/self-defence/weapons expert, which I emphatically did not claim. Instead, I've taken your explanations for granted and used them against you (one could say I've taken your gun and... oh well).

What stays is the essence: a teenage boy was killed for stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse. Your unspoken assertion seems to be: if you resist arrest, you get killed, can't possibly be prevented, next. If that is your persuasion, I rest my case.

Personally I find that rather cynical. This is a tragic event no matter who is at fault. For sure the police meet with resistance all the time? Do all the apprehended get killed? Is there really no other method than shoot-to-kill to resolve a situation with a reluctant person?

Indeed... our murder rate is pretty high compared to other "Western" style countries. But... our rate of crime for assault, robbery, etc., are often lower than others. Just compare our overall crime rate to Australia. We aren't necessarily better in the aggregate... but it is not like we are all fucking heathens either.

I was making a joke at your expense regarding the use of firearms by police. Most people, yourself included, think a cop is supposed to just fire once. This is perpetuated by the stupid depictions of shootings in the movies and TV. Cops are trained to fire repeatedly. Most shots miss, or do not hit anything vital. I read a study of shooting statistics that showed you need five hits before you had a reasonably certain chance of stopping someone.

Our idiot media never reports on this... so it sounds like a cop that fires multiple times is being racist and reckless, and evil. But... this is really how they are trained. Of course, our media is just going for eyeballs and viewers, so the truth is not so important to them. Smart people figure all this stuff out... but most people aren't smart.... and so... we get Ferguson. I don't know if I should laugh or cry sometimes.

I do know that there are things I can do as an American to be safe and happy.... and I do them. Get edjumacated... get a decent job... and move to a safe neighborhood. Yeah, it's selfish, but I really don't think my moving to a place like Ferguson is gonna really help anyone anyway. Sometimes I find myself saying... "Fuck those people", but I only do this as a defense mechanism. I feel that there is little I can do and it is sad and frustrating for me. So... I focus on the people around me.

Cops do work different in the USA. Officer Wilson had reason to believe Brown was dangerous and was a robbery suspect. The evidence shows that Brown assaulted Wilson and Wilson's weapon discharged in the patrol car. Wilson was doing his duty in my opinion by forcing Brown to surrender. I am rather pleased Brown was shot. Based on my review of the evidence, we are all better off without him.

Now.... in most other "Western" style countries, the cops would have let Brown just dash away and not try to make a arrest. Perhaps this is why property crime is higher in other countries. Remember... one of the biggest crimes in traditional America was stealing a horse. Horse thieves are the worst kind of villain. This is because a man without a horse is often just gonna starve to death. Don't steal shit that ain't yours. This ain't no fucking game cowboy.

In Texas you can shoot someone on your property if they are just stealing your car hubcaps. Haha. Just don't do it thug. You are putting your life in the hands of a local NRA member.

We certainly aren't perfect here. Things could be better. We are creating a future generation of educated people with money and power and a permanent class of uneducated people who riot. I think that taking guns away from cops is not gonna help. I am not saying I know a solution, but taking guns away from cops is not it.... unless you just want all your cops to be dead.

#169

http://www.twogag.com/comics/2014-11-26 ... ontest.jpg

#170

I'm trying to decide how the evidence that TM was a burglar compares with the evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist.

subject=changed

#171

jugheadnaut wrote:
Here you're just wrong, and demonstrably so. Your friend admits to you that he robbed a store last night. He's never charged. Are you wrong to call him a thief? Being charged with a crime is not a necessary condition to assert with confidence that someone has committed a crime. If there's sufficient evidence for it, it's perfectly appropriate. I've noticed a common misperception about the presumption of innocence. Many seem to believe it implies some kind of civic duty to not have the opinion that someone is guilty of a crime until convicted. It's not that at all. Presumption of innocence is solely a legal standard. An individual has both the legal and ethical right to reasonably conclude that someone is guilty of a crime even in the complete absence of a legal proceeding.

If someone told me that they had rob a store then I would be fine with calling them a thief. Martin never admitted to robbing people. His comment was that he was holding it for a friend, which I will admit sounds stupid but being a teenager I am not willing to just dismiss that.

I think part of the issue is our different backgrounds (all of us). I was a troubled young man. I did drugs and committed all types of crimes as a teenager in to my early 20s. I did a lot of crimes that I was never caught. I was caught on some stuff including a class C felony for which I spent time in prison for. I can look back on things I did, stupid stupid things, and see how they made sense to me at the time. I also know from some basic psychology classes in college that teenagers are not able to make rational decisions all the time. It's basic science.

I know that last part was off the rails a little but maybe it helps explain my position. Oh and for any lurkers out there who may want to use this against the pit. When I say I got way with a lot of stuff I am talking about buy/selling/ and doing drugs. When I was caught I admitted to my crime and I have served my time. Unlike some child rapist I have heard about.

#172

Jian Ghomeshi arrested.
http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/cri ... arges.html

#173

Brive1987 wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
I have been trying to get my wife to post here. I think she would blow a lot of people's minds
Always a delicate question ......

But would there be an, a'hem, cost involved?

I have no problem with that, and it would be worth every penny.

#174

bovarchist wrote:I'm trying to decide how the evidence that TM was a burglar compares with the evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist.

subject=changed

Jodi Arias was innocent of murdering Travis Alexander because she was domestically abused into it. Better subject change.

#175

bovarchist wrote:I'm trying to decide how the evidence that TM was a burglar compares with the evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist.

subject=changed

Byng Crosby is a rapist? Does Stills, Nash or Young know about that?

#176

free thoughtpolice wrote:
bovarchist wrote:I'm trying to decide how the evidence that TM was a burglar compares with the evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist.

subject=changed
Jodi Arias was innocent of murdering Travis Alexander because she was domestically abused into it. Better subject change.

Best subject change.

http://i.imgur.com/IwqVHP3.jpg

#177

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... ey-student

Idiot. You don't all run off in different directions when you see a bear. You stay and sex it up!

#178

I was making a joke at your expense regarding the use of firearms by police. Most people, yourself included, think a cop is supposed to just fire once. This is perpetuated by the stupid depictions of shootings in the movies and TV. Cops are trained to fire repeatedly. Most shots miss, or do not hit anything vital. I read a study of shooting statistics that showed you need five hits before you had a reasonably certain chance of stopping someone.

I can testify to that. If someone is charging you, accuracy goes pretty much to hell, and even if you hit them they don't automatically go down like in many fictional portrayals.

When I was doing an internship in a Swiss online newspaper, they showed us a video where a Nepalese police officer had to shoot down a person who was running towards their position, knife in hand. They kept charging until the officer emptied their magazine on them. The video was used by our online newspaper to argue against people who said that in similar case a Swiss officer had used excessive force.

A single shot can hit the person who is running towards you but is very unlikely to stop someone who has the momentum and the adrenaline to keep him coming.

#179

comhcinc wrote:
If someone told me that they had rob a store then I would be fine with calling them a thief. Martin never admitted to robbing people. His comment was that he was holding it for a friend, which I will admit sounds stupid but being a teenager I am not willing to just dismiss that.

I think part of the issue is our different backgrounds (all of us). I was a troubled young man. I did drugs and committed all types of crimes as a teenager in to my early 20s. I did a lot of crimes that I was never caught. I was caught on some stuff including a class C felony for which I spent time in prison for. I can look back on things I did, stupid stupid things, and see how they made sense to me at the time. I also know from some basic psychology classes in college that teenagers are not able to make rational decisions all the time. It's basic science.

I know that last part was off the rails a little but maybe it helps explain my position. Oh and for any lurkers out there who may want to use this against the pit. When I say I got way with a lot of stuff I am talking about buy/selling/ and doing drugs. When I was caught I admitted to my crime and I have served my time. Unlike some child rapist I have heard about.

I suspect that you never assaulted a police officer and went for his gun. I suspect you never told a cop he was too big a pussy to shoot you. I suspect that, when you were out pushing your luck you were not stupid enough to walk down the middle of the street, or refuse to move to the sidewalk when told to by a cop.

Some parts of the American black community are just plain barbarians. They do not think they need to be policed. They get their personal feelings of power from intentionally going after police. Those anti-cop rap songs are taken seriously by thousands and thousands of violent morons.

If you think about Ferguson, the only reason this went wrong was that a bunch of thugs got media attention by claiming Brown had his hands up. The Fuck?!?! And the protesters across the country are yelling "Hands up, don't shoot, no justice, no peace!" Okay... yeah... this doesn't say riot all over it... huh?

And the white SJWs claim all the anti-cop shit is freedom of speech. Nope... mostly it is just idiot violent shits who get their jollies off by proving how hard they can fight the man. Celebrating thug culture is not a good idea. But.... we will see what comes out of this. It's gonna get worse before it gets better. Us civilized folks (whites and blacks alike) gotta give out some more free shit to calm down the barbarians.

#180

:bjarte:

another lurker wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... ey-student

Idiot. You don't all run off in different directions when you see a bear. You stay and sex it up!

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... l-stalking

So it was stalking. OK then. Predators generally aren't a danger unless they are seriously hungry for some reason.

#181

http://i.imgur.com/zkCYMM0.jpg

#182

another lurker wrote::bjarte:
another lurker wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... ey-student

Idiot. You don't all run off in different directions when you see a bear. You stay and sex it up!
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... l-stalking

So it was stalking. OK then. Predators generally aren't a danger unless they are seriously hungry for some reason.

They fucking shot the bear just because it was a black bear. I'm gonna riot! :rimshot:

#183

feathers wrote: What stays is the essence: a teenage boy was killed for stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse. Your unspoken assertion seems to be: if you resist arrest, you get killed, can't possibly be prevented, next.

Just about everything here is wrong. Others have already pointed out that Brown wasn't killed for "stealing cigars and being an obstinate arse". But he also wasn't killed for resisting arrest. Wilson called in for backup after being told to fuck off and noticing the cigarellos. The purpose of the backup was to actually make the arrest, which was quite wise as things turned out. After the call, he cut them off with his car to stop them and that's when Brown started the physical confrontation that ultimately resulted in his death.

You also seem to be under the misapprehension that the only weapon American cops are equipped with is guns. They routinely have one or more sub-lethal weapons, such as a baton, taser, and pepper spray. Along with their training in restraining holds, this is what police use in difficult cases the huge majority of the time. Even though Wilson patrolled in a rather bad area, this is the first time he'd ever used his gun. For police, a gun has two purposes: deterrence and lethal force for when the situation calls for it. When there's an imminent serious physical threat to the police officer, none of the sub-lethal weapons are nearly as effective as a gun. Unless you get lucky, a baton is unlikely to win against an enraged aggressor outweighing you by 100 pounds. Tasers and pepper spray are accurate only at very short range. A taser may not work if the target is wearing heavy clothing. Pepper spray has different levels of effects on different people, and may backfire if the wind is against you. Wilson probably had at least one these devices at his disposal. It's clear from the evidence that the gun was his best option.

#184

John D wrote:I suspect that you never assaulted a police officer and went for his gun. I suspect you never told a cop he was too big a pussy to shoot you. I suspect that, when you were out pushing your luck you were not stupid enough to walk down the middle of the street, or refuse to move to the sidewalk when told to by a cop.

First I was speaking more about TM that MB. While I still feel that it would have been best that it go to a public trail I can't bemoan the tragic lost of MB life. The evidence is pretty clear.

Now no I never assaulted a cop. Yes I have in fact told a cop that he was too big of a pussy to shoot me. Yes I have pushed my luck way past what was smart and I completely see my 18 year old self just walking down the middle of the street being an asshole.

#185

free thoughtpolice wrote:
They fucking shot the bear just because it was a black bear. I'm gonna riot! :rimshot:

That bear was a stalker and a predator. Patel is lucky that the bear didn't rape him before killing him.

#186

comhcinc wrote:
John D wrote:I suspect that you never assaulted a police officer and went for his gun. I suspect you never told a cop he was too big a pussy to shoot you. I suspect that, when you were out pushing your luck you were not stupid enough to walk down the middle of the street, or refuse to move to the sidewalk when told to by a cop.

First I was speaking more about TM that MB. While I still feel that it would have been best that it go to a public trail I can't bemoan the tragic lost of MB life. The evidence is pretty clear.

Now no I never assaulted a cop. Yes I have in fact told a cop that he was too big of a pussy to shoot me. Yes I have pushed my luck way past what was smart and I completely see my 18 year old self just walking down the middle of the street being an asshole.

Wow... I am happy that you survived your near misses.

#187

free thoughtpolice wrote:
another lurker wrote::bjarte:
another lurker wrote:http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... ey-student

Idiot. You don't all run off in different directions when you see a bear. You stay and sex it up!
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014 ... l-stalking

So it was stalking. OK then. Predators generally aren't a danger unless they are seriously hungry for some reason.
They fucking shot the bear just because it was a black bear. I'm gonna riot! :rimshot:

A great white shark was spotted off the coast of Malibu, residents said "Well, at least it's white." --Robin Williams

#188

Kirbmarc wrote:
free thoughtpolice wrote:
They fucking shot the bear just because it was a black bear. I'm gonna riot! :rimshot:
That bear was a stalker and a predator. Patel is lucky that the bear didn't rape him before killing him.

Hey Darsh, if you take pics of a bear while you're hiking, you're gonna have a bad time.

#189

Hey Darsh, if you take pics of a bear while you're hiking, you're gonna have a bad time.

#NotAllBears

#190

John D wrote:I am rather pleased Brown was shot. Based on my review of the evidence, we are all better off without him.

:roll: