Um...wait.
So you're saying that if he wasn't in the open (but was still unarmed and still surrendering) it would be acceptable to kill him?
So you're saying that if the police didn't have "cover" from the unarmed unthreatening seated man/boy and/or his prone, unarmed, non threatening caretaker, it would be acceptable to kill him?
So you're saying that if someone felt threatened (which someone claimed they did, claiming he had a gun) it would be acceptable to kill whomever they are feeling threatened by, no matter what the actual threat level? (wouldn't that make it open season on cops, who make any reasonable black man feel threatened/in fear for their life?)
Are you saying that, had one of them actually HAD a gun, it would automatically be acceptable to kill them? (would that stand if it was a white woman with the gun? Why would it not stand for a man wearing blue?)

More than 'pressure' needs to be applied....the law needs to be applied. Police are not above the law, and have to account for their actions. When those actions are so incredibly unacceptable in so many ways, that accountability needs to include serious prison time or there's no accountability in reality. It's only by pure luck that there weren't two dead victims here....and there was NEVER a reason for ANY firearm to be drawn. If the cops don't see a gun, they should never pull theirs....they could reasonably un-latch their holsters IMO, and even put their hand on it, but not ever pull it until someone else brandishes theirs, and never shoot until someone else shoots first....IMO. They have a duty to be MORE responsible than the average citizen, not less.

I've been pretty clear that I think it is important to understand the perspective of the police in these situations.

One could make an argument about how they are justified about having guns drawn, since they are replying to a call concerning someone walking around with a gun, and maybe the truck could be mistaken for a gun.

But, at best, that leaves the cop that shot him with a real weak ass argument: "I mistook something he was holding for a gun. I didn't get close enough to see if it was a gun, despite the standoff being very calm. I also didn't maneuver to a position that gave me a proper shooting lane on the suspect. I then accidently discharged my weapon, and hit an innocent party, who was lying on the ground in an non threatening and submissive manner." Sorry, but if that is the best argument you have, you're pretty much fucked.

You probably don't realise that that's what you said, but it is. After all, it sounds ridiculous when put explicitly.

Nevertheless, that is the undeniable implication of the claim that my negative opinion of others is false because these others may hold a similar opinion about me. It's the condition of the world that everyone thinks themselves righteous. The difference isn't made up by pretending therefore that everyone's the same. A distinction is drawn on a foundation of solid argument.

Here's some more things you've said:

1. Islam is immoral.
2. Muslims are just as good as anybody else.

I'm in a position to correct that contradiction in your thinking, but to do so you'll remember there's an affirmation I need you to make.

It follows exactly. We are accountable for the things we do and for the things we would do if circumstance allowed.

Were I to tell you I was, say, pro-choice, you would be in a strong position to guess at my attitude toward a particular ethical question. If you then learned that I'd had no abortions personally, would you therefore label me a pro-lifer in spite of my stated position?

Well then, what if I tell you about an infamous tyrant of my acquaintance, a monster who committed every crime against humanity he had the means to commit, and whom I believe to be the very best person who ever lived. I tell you I intend to follow the shining example of this nightmare, shall we say religiously, for the rest of my life. Do you really presume to claim that no negative inference can be drawn about my character whatsoever? What guess would you make about my propensity for insane, vicious murder?

I have yet to have an abortion, it might be said largely in consequence of my lacking certain procedural necessities. Yet I remain pro-choice. The majority of muslims in civilised countries, the minority in muslim countries, have committed no great atrocities. Yet they remain muslim.

The warplane is designed to kill, but who is it killing - is it killing an evil dictator in order to save innocents? It might be on a peace keeping mission to discourage any killing. If it the warplane is killing only people who would otherwise be killing the innocent, then it's a tool used for good, it's saving more lives than it's taking, and more importantly it's saving lives that are more important to maintaining a civilized society.
I'd even say that it would be less moral to not build the warplane and let innocents die through inaction, when the consequences are well known.

Even further down the chain, killing isn't inherently bad, there are plenty justifiable reasons to kill someone.

It's the same with veganism -making choices which are less harmful, not necessarily perfect.


Non smokers are definitely way better people than smokers. Especially given that 2nd and even 3rd hand smoke causes cancer. Even if smoking only harmed the smoker, it's still a strange idea to be harming yourself. Perhaps they lack the appreciation of how lucky they are to be alive. I mean the odds of being born are like winning the lotto, let alone being born healthy, being born in this day and age, in a civilized country, being born to the dominate species, being born on the only planet that seems to have developed life. Some people have rough starts to life, but harming themselves isn't going to make it better, just shorter.


I agree that everyone is capable of making good moral stances, you've obviously drawn the line somewhere (otherwise you'd be going all Genghis Khan on everyone). But where the line is drawn is tends to be influenced a lot by misleading information and lack of information. And that makes it very hard to make logically sound choices. It's even harder when in order to understand the real impact means having to watch footage of animal cruelty. Most people find it confronting and uncomfortable at best, so it's easier to put it away, not think about it and continue consuming.

I know most people are moral, but if they don't act on it, it doesn't mean much to the puppies being strayed in the eyes with chemicals, or to the piglets being slammed into the concrete floor for the crime of being born male.


Regardless of how you categorize it, analyze it, or philosophize it, this always remains true: Animals feel and respond to pain, they will do their best to avoid suffering, and they have a will to live.

Drawn-on eyebrows and eye shadow? I'd say that's a little more than stage makeup. It's no longer just a stage. It's full-on commitment.

After reading some more on the subject, this has been that way for many decades, possibly longer but the history is spotty further back. The CSIRO thinks it is possibly due to the nearness of a coal seam to the rifts and/or drought.

The recent fracking has drawn attention to it, with many locals claiming it has gotten worse since the fracking. Scientists are still researching it further to see if this is true.

I don't support fracking, but some of these reports usually are about things that were pre-existing due to the natural layout of the region. However, there are some cases where it is definitely a cause of the companies fracking in the area.

For instance, a recent study proved that drinking wells in Texas and Pennsylvania were affected by the fracking company not following the correct procedures. This led to the wells being contaminated with gas. They found that there were clear cases of substandard work that led to cracked steel and concrete in the casing of the drill sites. They said in the study that if the companies had followed the correct procedures, the contamination could have been easily prevented.

More on the wells - http://www.newsweek.com/fracking-wells-tainting-drinking-water-texas-and-pennsylvania-study-finds-270735

They probably should use the same method to check the origin of the noble gases in that river.

One view emphasizes events occurring during and after the Allied occupation of Japan (1945–1952), and stresses that manga was strongly shaped by United States cultural influences, including US comics brought to Japan by the GIs and by images and themes from US television, film, and cartoons (especially Disney).

There are two schools of thought on this theory; the link you provided is from someone who believes in the other school of thought, which is fine, but it is not the end all definition. Additionally, I never said the characters weren't Asian in the manga or anime, I said jokingly that they are drawn with western characteristics like the rounder Occidental eyes.

Clearly the original character is meant to be Japanese, and the studio certainly could replace a known actress with lots of draw power with a lesser known actress, but realistically this is meant to make money. Just like "All you need is kill" was redone and cast with money making actors as Edge of Tomorrow. In the end, the studio is selling a product and is going to want to make the most money possible, so casting will almost always go to an actor that pulls a fan base.

@newtboy I wasn't attempting to say that the character was meant to be western, I was merely joking about the art style. Sorry for any confusion I may have put forth.

...And @Ghostly wins the thread with the odd tactic of using facts and psychology tenants to remove racial confusion.

Yeah, sorry guys. Anime characters are Japanese unless drawn as American or British 'white'. Stories about Japan, set in Japan, with Japanese characters being played by white people is whitewashing. The fact that her character is now renamed "Major" should tell you something.

Major Motoko Kusanagi has always appeared 'Japanese' to me, even her cyborg face looked 'Japanese' to me. Those that think the anime character looks 'white' must also think that, in the anime world, Japan is populated solely with white people, because they all look like her except the actual Americans.

Uh no, anime characters are not "drawn to look more like westerners"

I think this article explains it well:
http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2010/08/30/guest-post-why-do-the-japanese-draw-themselves-as-white/

NBA's Response


NBA Response to New York Times Story on Flagrant Fouls and Charlotte Hornets guard Jeremy Lin
April 15, 2016

After reviewing our extensive officiating database, we have found no data that suggests Jeremy Lin is disadvantaged by our officiating staff. NBA referees use a set of criteria (available here) provided by the league office in determining whether a foul should be called flagrant. Following the game, contact that is deemed flagrant by referees and other hard contact (whether called or not) is reviewed by NBA Basketball Operations. As part of that review, Basketball Operations uses that same set of criteria, multiple video angles and enhancements, and its comparable database to calibrate its judgment. When deemed appropriate, a foul can be upgraded or downgraded and applicable penalties can be assessed. While some of the plays in the video involved hard contact, none was subsequently deemed a Flagrant Foul given the full circumstances, angles and comparables from past games.

With respect to the data, over the last three seasons, Mr. Lin ranked 21st among all players in number of drives to the basket with 1,537. While he has not drawn a flagrant foul in that time, neither have other guards known for their driving ability like Reggie Jackson (2,031 drives), Tony Parker (1,974), Tyreke Evans (1,969), Ty Lawson (1,891), Kyrie Irving (1,649) or Victor Oladipo (1,544). Conversely, Mr. Lin has drawn more common fouls on those drives than any of those previously listed players and has drawn fouls at the seventh-highest rate among the 23 players with more than 1,500 drives.

Furthermore, given the infrequency of flagrant fouls (roughly 1 per every 500 foul calls), it is not statistically significant that none of Mr. Lin’s 814 fouls drawn were deemed flagrant.

Watch the last minute for a synopsis of the method.... watch the entire video and suffer mild torture at how drawn out, methodical and long this process takes.

I watched all 6, still can't decide how the heck to rate this one. Couple really great laughs, some really drawn out jokes and quite a high production value. Youtube certainly opens the realm of the possible!

Give a fuck whatchya heard
Yeah fuck whatchya heard
Fore this real shit kicked your whole click to the curb
What, what...
But you don't hear me though

Run up bitch ta da death get gripped my steeze is ballin' out
Of control whatchyou know 'bout bubblin'
Hustle bones comin' out my mouth

Hustle bones comin' out my mouth [repeat]

That hot lic a shot
Never not strapped
Wit a Glock tongue cocked
Run it back
That knock a cop off unconscious Molotov
Cocktailin' sound bomb a snitch
Flat line of chalk drawn round the clock
Too many marks dropped ta count the stiffs

Stuck on the fence
How does it feel
It don't make sense
Nothing is

That rip you a new one trick I'm the true one,
And only never know me never will no son
Leave ya laid out ta fade out
Show a cunt the door
Hit and run
Hustle bones comin' out my mouth

Hustle bones comin' out my mouth [repeat]

That can't wait ta blast
Blood stained knuckle brass gives a fuck sick wit it flav on
That ex con
Hard to da bone
Darkness from the zone
Mastered and pushed far beyond

Eons beyond the line never crossed,
By dem punks livin' soft while I ride that bomb
Dr. Strangelove
Into the sun
Look no hands megatons
Rode like man we can't lose
No shit, no shit

That hit it till it drip wit
Da blood of the raw way
It was fore dem forgot
Why doin' dirt, make slang sound tough gong original
fuck da wrong way
Only one real way to work
That shit out da
Beat street spit
Über freaked heat lit
Hell flame to your brain
Blood thirst
What what...
Run it back, run it

Run up bitch ta da death get gripped my steeze is ballin' out
Of control whatchyou know 'bout bubblin'
Hustle bones comin' out my mouth

Hustle bones comin' out my mouth [repeat]

Criminal intent anti-legal ill
Thief in da night peel your life back spin the wheel
[x4]

Run it back, run it