rehmwa

I don't either when it's two consenting types - personal to just settle things. Another general comment. I do for cops. They are not 'in' the fight, it's not supposed to be fair. It's their JOB, it's not personal, why should they put it on the line so someone that's a danger to all of us can claim an equal fight, that's stupid. When a criminal pulls a knife, I want the cop to have a gun. What I want is better cops so this imbalance makes sense all the time. (Dash cams is certainly one good way to move in that direction for those locales that need to) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I say we meet a peaceful protest with cautious observation. I'd say we meet a violent protest with those things. (Better if able to go and tactically just arrest participating individuals, I don't know how difficult that is) I'm just speaking in general, you know. I'll watch your link later. Hopefully it has the entire context and not just carefully selected edits. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'll second that; I would feel a lot better learning that they were doing/saying dumbass things because they were stoned, rather than just because they were the paid mouthpieces of big corporate donors. or just idiots even when sober ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'd agree with that. But I don't think cops treat all citizens as if they were violent felons. I think good cops just should be courteous and polite, but be ready in case the random person turns out to be a violent felon. Do you see the difference? (your contention is that cops don't do that - I'd contend you are judging the whole group by a bad subgroup. Anvil only turns me off because he opened the tread with a racial assumption that's just too broad to be anything but trolling) But what about reality? - Any cop has to be careful because what he does know is that there is a chance that in this crowd of 500 people, there might be ONE violent felon, out of control on something and armed and unreasonable, that will target him or any one of the other 498 people that he is supposed to protect. Oh - and he doesn't know which person it is out of that crowd. same goes for approaching a car - clearly 99.99% of the time it's safe. But you don't know if THIS TIME you are approaching the 00.01% car with the psycho in the front seat. So you play it safe 100% of the time, and you also are courteous and kind 100% of the time - it's just a job. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I like the idea, but it's too cumbersome. Until we have a good screen (or preliminary screen) that gives results pretty much right now, relatively cheaply, and on site, then that kind of testing/criteria is just a concept that can't really be implemented in a cost beneficial way. (I mean pretty much drop hair or a nail clipping into a tube and red or green light comes on within a minute type of thing). Invent that first, then let's talk about it. (I'm sure if the machine existed, then private and public groups would have one on site - so the question about testing public servants.... lawmakers, cops, etc would be in the mix for sure). ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If you look at #5, he is refining this to a 'subgroup' - that's a step in the right direction in this communication. IMO, still misses the point though. We can take #5 as true - But the definition of "certain group" should be changed to "criminals and criminally opportunistic" and left at that. If we want to focus on real cause, I'd not lazily apply the cosmetic (skin color, eye color, etc etc etc ad nauseum) distinction to define the group, rather apply the behavior and attitude and background to define individuals that compose the group. (match up things like attitude and background and anyone of any race will be out looting....as the pictures show) Causal effects include upbringing, environment, education, etc etc etc --- these are actionable items. Skin color? how do you act on that? correlation does NOT equal causation and focusing on things that can't be acted on is non-productive and perpetuates the problem. IMO Instead of saying "90% of them are black", I'd rather say "what does 100% of them have in common?" (the 90% thing is silly if the neighborhood is proportionately populated to the same as the subgroup that's looting) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

strawman BV strikes again - of course you wouldn't automate any of it would you. by your argument, they could just cover the camera or break it at will with no consequences ideas are always easy, implementation is where the rubber meets the road So you think it's a great idea for employers to do that for all jobs? teaching, doctors, your job, etc? we can make pro and con arguments for just about all fields ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

tried it twice, the results sucked the first time we ended up building a barn for an old couple the other one violently broke out into a picnic and volleyball game yet people seem to glamorize highly concentrated urban areas, maybe that's the real problem ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'd say it's no more correct for companies to try and fix wages and salaries than it is for the government to try and do it either. Who wants to discuss this and how it relates to minimum wage laws, health insurance fixing, subsidies, penalties, price fixing, etc by uncle sam? Let the free market work. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

agreed - now up to 1,000,001 good cops should demand it they shouldn't have to have it enabled 100% of the time, only during direct interactions, ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

this ^ and it applies to SO MANY other topics it's just plain silly people still say such excessively over-generalized and unproductive crap ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

actually, that one was pretty decently written - top quality rant for sure ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I believe that you are mistaken when it comes to at least 6 posters I can think of. I didn't say I thought I was correct. I just operate under that assumption because it's not palatable to think there is that much ignorance and vitriol on both side of the aisle in people that I normally would greatly appreciate and like. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Interesting turn of phrase there - so now using a WMD on someone is "giving them an excuse" to fight back. pretty sums up one side of the discussion perfectly, doesn't it? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Usually 3 other Big Bangs but if you go early enough, it's usually a Bones rerun, or a How I Met Your Mother ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I absolutely agree here. Frankly, I suspect that the leadership of Hamas might have, on a few times, agreed to a cease fire and intended to. BUT, the followers are fanatics, so even if the leaders make the attempt, it just takes some idiot fanatic in a school somewhere to load up a couple rockets and fire them "unilaterally". Thus breaking the cease fire. Hamas, of course, will be too proud to admit they have zero control over their fanatical followers. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

nice post I actually do operate under the assumption that the more of an out of control caricature a poster is, the more likely they are play acting for their own personal entertainment. I consider that to be a form of art. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I agree with you here, and also add liberals to the comment along with conservatives. The self identified Libertarians (or libertarians) seem to think things through better. and the FEW cons or libs that actually do think and discuss seem to be really closet libertarians when you look at their positions. speaking of spittle based diatribes - if we put Airdvr and Funjumper in the same room would they cancel each other out and emit a huge volume of sustainable energy? Or would it be absorbed by the usual tirade speakers from both sides? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Wow, rocket, that was pretty much perfect. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

though true - Obama would be super naive to try and use Jimmy for anything. Jimmy is way past his prime for this type of tasking. O is not that dumb to use him. Pretending or assuming this is scripted by the executive branch is silly. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Over the years, I've read many articles about the Carter administration, and they can all be distilled to 3 points: 1. Carter was an outsider in Washington. He had never served there as a representative nor a senator, so he had no established friends there, and did not know how the political machine worked. 2. He appointed people he knew, (and had worked with in the past), to administrative positions. Of course these were people from Georgia, so this only exacerbated problem #1. 3. He was a micromanager, and spent too much time dwelling on details that should have been delegated, and not enough time on the big picture. That said, I still think Carter was probably the most decent human being to serve as POTUS in my lifetime, and the one who I would most want to be my next-door neighbor. this is absolutely dead on target IMHO However, his large view on social issues is destructive to society. But his local view is great - building homes and charity work is laudable. In his case, he should "think local, act local" and the stay the hell out of the limelight. But even a nice guy like Jimmy got caught up in thinking he's on the big stage. He's got serious foot in mouth/ass syndrome now whenever he talks world view. And he's also become seriously partisan-dumb. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Jimmy wasn't an idiot - he was extremely high functioning in many areas. he was just a lousy president - super smart doesn't necessarily make a good pres. even so - how does one prove "again" their idiocy. once it's proven, I didn't think it needed repeats ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I agree, as long as you put the word "generally" in there. And that would be appropriate and align with a system of laws relatively simple to understand and enforce. But it seems that we have a lot of laws that are pretty random and not aligned with anything of the sort. Seems the more "nuanced" the law, the more capricious the actual result and intent - if not outright biased and wrong. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Legally vs responsible vs morally are all very different things I know you are making this point, I'm just on board I'm in full agreement with Billvon in terms of how I viscerally feel about it (responsibility-wise and morally and about how makes the final 'choice') - I also agree with the legal position as well in terms of who is culpable for the result in terms of protecting society from others. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Probably the same as a math or physics PhD to opine on politics or meteorology.....I suspect his position has a huge following anyway that has published and peer-reviewed their position. Seems that's all it takes nowadays to push agendas and take your money ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants