search results matching tag: Drawn

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (242)     Sift Talk (13)     Blogs (11)     Comments (934)   

school of life-what comes after religion?

lantern53 says...

Just like most things, belief can swing back and forth like a pendulum. But that pendulum will never swing one way (toward atheism) and stop.

Because a belief in a higher power is hard-coded into our DNA. Religion is man's attempt to interpret this. Some interpretations are more accurate than others, but 'whatever floats your boat'. There is great diversity in the creation, and great diversity in Man's interpretation of belief systems.

Atheism is also a belief. It requires a great deal of faith. Atheists are the few dissonant chords allowed in the symphony. But if you are drawn to that dissonance, you are out of tune.

The fish doesn't have to believe in the ocean. It's always there and sustains the fish. But the fish can't live outside of it.

Watch German official squirm when confronted with Greece

vil says...

Everyone knows what has to happen but everyone has his own fancy angle on how and why and when and whose fault it is.

A country has spent all the money it could possibly borrow and then some, and has just voted not to stop spending.

Hey Greece, you will have to stop spending one day, the only thing that is not certain is how long this mess can be drawn out. While stopping spending may not look like it can help restart your economy, not getting any further external economic props might just make something happen.

It will be interesting to see how the political bits and pieces will work themselves out.

Its like your cousin borrowed some money from you and leased a fancy car like you have. He cant start paying you back just now, in fact he cant afford the downpayments anymore and now you either have to lend him more money or he has to go back to riding on the bus and the whole car is lost. You hate him because he lied to you about his income and he hates you because you cant really afford to "lend" more money right now.

PS: my bet is Greece gets to keep the car somehow.

Driver Beaten And Tazed As St Louis Police Shut Off Dashcam

Pasco police pursuing, and shooting, an unarmed man

newtboy says...

Yes, I understand they are taught to shoot to kill, I just think it's wrong to do so.
If it was an unavoidable situation of a single officer against a single offender, I would agree. Since there were 3, one of them could have safely moved to trying non-lethal force, with a double helping of deadly force instantly backing him up if it doesn't work. If not taser, bean bags, sticky foam, flash bang, etc. They have many means of non-lethal force that work almost every time. That should be the normal, daily way of doing it. That's why they call for backup. If they're just going to all shoot to kill anyway, why not just save time and money and do it alone? If they're only going to try lethal force, can we stop paying for all that non-lethal equipment we give them?
Shooting rapid fire and randomly in the direction of a 'perp' puts the public at risk. The first 5+ shots all missed him and flew down the street, I'm curious if anyone was hit.
If they don't even attempt non-lethal means of halting the criminal, there WAS a much better alternative. If lethal force is acceptable in any unknown situation, it's become a war of 'us vs them' where any police stop may end in one or both parties being killed because the cop wasn't sure he was safe, that's not a good outcome. When there are multiple officers, at least one should always TRY non-lethal force. If it's appropriate to have multiple guns drawn and pointed at a human's head, it's appropriate to try to taser them or bean bag them before shooting a full clip of live rounds.

If 'potential threat' is the only metric needed to justify homicide, every cop on the beat could be legally shot. They are all armed, and known to shoot to kill at the slightest provocation. Killing them would be self defense in every case if that was the only thing needed to make it acceptable, as they are all not just 'potential threats', but actual deadly threats known to be armed and homicidal.
That's why that theory doesn't work in my eyes. It leads to more killings, which leads to more fear, which leads to more killings, which leads to more fear.... Cops are trained and armed and given bullet proof vests, cut proof gloves/sleeves, and have massive backup. If they intentionally put themselves in a position where they are alone against an unknown threat, then kill out of fear of the situation they put themselves in, how is that not inappropriate? I really don't get it.
(I do get that sometimes (rarely) it's unavoidable, but most times a little patience and a little less 'contempt of cop- punishable by death' would diffuse situations that police instead often escalate into homicide because of a complete lack of patience or empathy, or out of anger because they were 'disrespected' by not having their commands followed instantly)

lucky760 said:

That would seem to be common sense except that same textbook instructs officers to only shoot to kill; if they fire, they are only supposed to do so to kill because doing otherwise may result in the perp still being able to harm them or others. (That's why I'm always bumped in movies and TV shows when a cop shoots a bad guy just once.)

Any other non-lethal uses of force could not be used in this kind of situation for that same reason. If they are approaching an unknown subject who is acting erratically and on the move and may be armed (meaning they are not proven to be unarmed), it's understandable [to me] they can't risk just attempting to disable him when doing so could put themselves or bystanders in danger if the guy pulls a gun and starts shooting.

Non-lethal means of disablement don't always disable a person. I've seen suspects get hooks directly and fully into the skin for a tasering, but be completely unaffected. Adrenaline and PCP work wonders in making you impervious to pain.

It's always easiest after the fact to assume there was a much better alternative, but in those precious few moments where you're concerned for the safety of yourself and everyone around you, the options that will guarantee that safety are limited.

Of course these kinds of things are debatable and always subject to ideas about what the cops could have or should have done and what the suspect did and could have or should have done, but the only certainty is that there was a potential threat and they took the only action that could guarantee that that threat was neutralized.

Don't speak english? Alabama Police Have Something For You

skinnydaddy1 says...

Alabama Police Officer Arrested Over Severe Injuries To Indian Man

The police chief in Madison, Ala., says that an officer who threw a man to the ground faces assault charges and dismissal. Sureshbhai Patel, 57, was stopped last week as he walked in his son's new neighborhood. Patel remains hospitalized after surgery to fuse bones in his neck; his son says he now has limited mobility.

"I found that Officer Eric Parker's actions did not meet the high standards and expectations of the Madison City Police Department," Chief of Police Larry Muncey said after an investigation. He added that he is recommending Parker be fired.

Parker, who the department says is a training officer who had a trainee riding with him at the time of last week's incident, turned himself in to police yesterday; he faces a charge of third-degree assault, Muncey, said, adding that the FBI is conducting a parallel inquiry into any possible federal infractions.

The case has drawn attention both because of the circumstances and due to video footage of the incident captured by a dashboard camera. That footage, released Thursday, shows that Parker sent Patel to the ground in such a way that for a brief instant, Patel was completely airborne — until his head and upper body hit the ground.

Patel had recently come from India to help care for his infant grandson; he was stopped by police on the morning of Feb. 6, after a neighbor called to report what they saw as a suspicious figure. When police approached Patel, who speaks little English, he was unable to answer their questions about what he was doing in the area.

According to local news site AL.com, Patel's son, Chirag, is an engineer who recently bought a home in Madison, a town about 10 miles west of Huntsville. The family has filed a federal lawsuit over the incident, saying police used excessive force and had no reason to stop the elder Patel.

"This is a good neighborhood. I didn't expect anything to happen," Chirag Patel told AL.com earlier this week.

In a statement released Thursday, Muncey said, "I sincerely apologize to Mr. Patel, his family and our community...our desire is to exceed everyone's expectations."

A GoFundMe account set up in Patel's name has raised more than $50,000 since it was created two days ago. The call for help notes the family's lawsuit and medical bills.

Audio released by the police department includes the phone call that sent officers to check on Patel. In it, the caller says he's seen the same man walking in the neighborhood for a second day.

Describing him, the caller says, "He's a skinny black guy, he's got a toboggan on; he's really skinny. And I've lived here four years. I've never seen him before."

The man adds that he's on his way to work and is nervous about leaving his wife at home with the man standing across the street.

"I'd like somebody to talk to him," he says.

Parker then responded to the police dispatcher's call.

VideoSift Sarzy's Top Ten Movies of 2014

Sarzy says...

Honestly,when it comes to action I just go by what strikes me as cinematically interesting, and what I enjoy. There tends to be a lot of action and other genre stuff among my favourite films, mostly because I try not to draw any distinctions between so-called "serious" films, and genre stuff like action/horror/sci-fi. If a film works, it works. It takes just as much thought and craft to make a really good action film as it does to make a really good drama. More, possibly.

My problem with a lot of contemporary big blockbuster action filmmaking is the idea that bigger is ALWAYS better. Bigger effects, bigger explosions, and longer, more drawn out action set-pieces. Like, if I see one more film where the third act is entirely devoted to an enormous action set-piece where a city is rocked by a big, over-the-top battle, I'm going to jump out a window.

My other big problem with most contemporary action is the style of shooting/editing that dictates that you put the camera as close to the action as possible and then just ping pong from one split-second close-up of something happening to another. There's no real coherence, just a jumble of imagery and the hope that the viewer will be fooled into thinking they're watching something exciting.

I appreciate films like the Raid 2 or John Wick because they're clearly made by people who understand what makes a good action scene exciting. They're well paced, exciting, and they're just fun to watch.

Fairbs said:

I was going to comment on your inclusion of a lot of action movies. Your clarification to bareboards is helpful. Do you draw distinctions around what is believable in action movies? I've found myself get a bit jaded over the years with how everything has to be bigger and now with 17% more explosions. A good example is how the James Bond movies have evolved. Part of it was how technology evolved in the movie industry. I think that the old Bond movies that included high tech gadgets were so much cooler and the newer ones became unrealistic. I appreciated the reboot of that series because they went back to the old ways, but it seems that they are already going down the bigger and bigger road again.

How fracking works

xxovercastxx says...

I'm not endorsing the practice but I will point out that doing it is the only way we'll discover the long term results.

All I'm trying to say is that once something gets tied up in politics, it's near impossible to learn about it. Once it's political, lines are drawn and people take sides and you're either a shill or a hippie.

I'm from a small town in upstate NY in an area where fracking was to really take root. Fortunately (?) it's just been banned. I would have liked to know what the risks are and their likelihood, at least to the best of our knowledge. I'm sure there are people out there who have this information, but I have no way to identify them.

The shills say it's very safe, but I don't trust them at all. The hippies say it's going to kill us all, but they say the same thing about GMOs. I'm sure the truth lies somewhere in the middle, but few people are offering nuanced opinions and I can't assume they're correct just because they are.

I have no way of knowing what's true and what's not and it pisses me off a bit.

dannym3141 said:

I rather feel that that puts the argument in a skewed light. Essentially, we are either in full awareness of the facts and long term results of fracking or we are not. If we are not yet, why on earth would we pursue it now? We have alternative forms of energy production, it's just a whole bunch of very rich people aren't quite done selling us oil yet.

Need More Proof That The Music Industry Is Fake? Here You Go

Grimm says...

Also to be fair that's a bunch of bullshit...the technology exists to overcome all of those issues. You really can't count it as she IS singing if no one can hear it and what they can hear is a pre-recorded track...one that was most likely auto-tuned so even THAT isn't a live pre-recording.

I just don't get the logic of the fans and the defenders....you like the music you "hear" on the radio...you like the music you "hear" on your CDs or MP3s. When you are paying top dollar to "hear" and now "see" that music performed live why is it OK to let the "live music" slide and be sacrificed for a dog and pony show that doesn't have anything to do with the music you were drawn to in the first place?

Payback said:

Also, to be fair, when someone doesn't have a loop back of their voice, and there's tons of sound so they can't hear themselves directly, it's like a deaf person singing. Britney IS singing. This would not be accurately described as lip-sync as in the Milli Vanilli crap. This is definitely "overdubbing" with the second track being edited out. Also, as she knows her voice isn't actually being amplified, she's not really trying. This isn't an Autotuned performance either.

Absent-Minded FedEx Guy Drives Truck With Back Open

newtboy (Member Profile)

newtboy (Member Profile)

jon stewart-rage against the rage against the machine

newtboy says...

From my point of view, your argument is asinine.
He (Lantern) made a definitive statement based on some witnesses and evidence by saying 'credible evidence' (which strongly implys that only the witness and evidence/interpretations that agreed with the police version is credible, and all others are not), I pointed out that far more witnesses had disputed that version of events, and the evidence is up for interpretation, not definitive.
You also discount (nearly) all local witnesses (and go on to insult them for no reason, or is it just racism that makes you label them 'low intelligence'?), then you try to make a point about group impressions using a group that absolutely DOES lie, in the performance of their duties they are TRAINED to lie to get information and/or compliance, and some are just natural liars to boot, and also a group that's historically well known as being incredibly over-defensive of their own, even when it's insanely obvious their own are in the wrong. I can't fathom how you think that makes a good point. (also not sure why you bring race into it again)

Another interpretation of the head shot evidence is that he was falling, having been shot multiple times already, and was shot in the top of the head on the way down. That was what more than one eye witness said happened. Are you implying that they were (low intelligence) criminalist masterminds that instantly knew what false story could still be born out by evidence, colluded, and gave that version? There was no gun shot residue on him, so he was not within arms length to grab anyone. That's fairly certain.

Yes, the DA certainly seemed to throw the case away. He did not act as prosecutor, (giving only evidence and interpretation that implies guilt,) but instead gave the jury all 'evidence' (including that which implied innocence, and allowed the jury to interpret it), allowed 'defense testimony' (without question, cross, or dispute), and gave insane legal instructions in order to confuse (like giving them the long invalidated law, then last minute telling them it might or might not apply, but don't worry why, it's not a law class). That's all totally abnormal, so the grand jury process was clearly abused by the DA with an aim to not get a trial. I'm fairly certain that's how most people see it too. It seemed fairly blatant.

I would agree that the more officers the better seems logical, but no longer holds true if ALL the officers over react (like 8 people on top of one man for an infraction, or never trying tasers because they 'might not stop the aggressor', even when there's already 10 officers with guns drawn). If officers tried the least amount of force required FIRST, rather than jump to the maximum allowed instantly, everyone would be happier. Sadly they do not.

If the feeling in the community (local and at large) was that this was an isolated incident, no amount of cajoling by a single distraught parent would cause rallies or riots. Instead they're happening across the country, and yet you blame a grieving father rather than the aggrieved's stated issue(s)/targets.

I'm glad that at least in the Garner case, you can see the injustice of killing an unarmed man (or even 'just' brutally attacking him) over such a minor infraction.

Lawdeedaw said:

"That depends on who you ask...witnesses..." Really... Yeah, the same shit is argued by "witnesses" for the CIA that argue the CIA does not "torture" people. THAT ARGUMENT in general is utterly asinine. A group of people, many who contradicted each other in the heat of the moment want to portray the outsider as a bad guy...it doesn't help that most of them are low intelligence. Imagine if it had all been white police officers who were the "witnesses", you sure as hell would not side with them. You would say they lie, or defend one another...

Additionally, even if not intentionally, I know that mistaken identity has screwed so many innocent people because in a crisis situation your cognitive functions all but lie to you. You just don't remember things very clearly--even if you are unbiased.

So what do you do? Fault imperfect humans in an imperfect situation? No, you look at the physical evidence. Did the bullet enter the top of his head? Well then he was under the officer and people underneath someone usually try to take someone to the ground, etc. The DA threw the cases away...um, no...the Grand Jury did...the DA has considerable sway there, yes, but then so does public perception...

As a sidebar I should add that in proper uses of force, not Garner's particular situation at all, the more officers on a subject the better. This prevents injury by immobilizing someone. The more someone moves the more force that eventually has to be used. That is the principle behind the tazer. Yeah, I could rip you off the car door you grab on to resist arrest, or I could taze you. Potentially rip your arm out of its socket, or shock you for five seconds...same with three or four people grabbing you to gain compliance. Same reason handcuffs are applied.

jon stewart-rage against the rage against the machine

Lawdeedaw says...

Okay newtboy, I understand you are frustrated. New York was bullshit and should not have happened. A manslaughter charge would have been appropriate in this case, at the least. And now remember, I am no friend of bullshit law enforcement choices.

But your arguments are just as bad as Lantern's arguments. They are utter shit. Beneath you by and far. I myself have been drawn down at gunpoint for a simple traffic screw up, but then it was night and I had almost ran into him because I was tired. Shit happens. I knew my place. My dumb cunt wife at the time got out of the car anyways, even when she was ordered back in. He pointed it harder at me--instead of her. Yeah, that's smart.

Anyways, I will talk about your posts in another separate post.

newtboy said:

That all depends on who you listen to. Most witnesses said he did.
Garner died from being choked to death. Period. It was not necessary at all, was against department rules, and was many many levels of escalation from what he was doing, standing surrounded by 8 cops.
Because the DA threw both cases in the toilet, we'll never know.
Can you see how that makes the police less popular and more feared and hated? If not, I think that's a major part of the issue.
I'm glad you didn't try to defend the cop why beat up the 77 year old man over absolutely nothing. (trying to angrily snatch papers without notice and having them pulled away is not cause or resisting, BTW)

judge dredd-interrogation scene

gorillaman says...

No man, that body armour, those boots...I'd harvest the bones of a thousand murdered infants to build our bed if that's what it took. Do you think that's what she wants?

I had to go rewatch this. It's practically perfect. Not an origin story, no romance subplot, no compromise. Just a day in the life of Judge Dredd. Love it, but my favourite Dredd story was told in rhyme:

They'd been waiting there since nightfall for the Sharks to come along,
They knew they'd have to pass this stretch of street.
So they'd sharpened up their stickers and they'd brought along their bars,
And they were wearing steel-tipped stompers on their feet.

There was Big Frank Zit and Faceache, Crazy Joseph with his spear,
The Dixon Boys were there and Billy Rat.
Ike the Spike had brought his sister with her homemade ghetto blaster,
And the Ghoul had put new rivets in his bat.

Now it wasn't nothin' personal that they had against the Sharks,
Any bunch of dead-end spugs would do.
'Cos there was nothing they liked better than to mash and bash and stomp,
Same as any normal Mega-City juves.

"A-rumbling! A-rumbling! We love to go A-rumbling!
("AAAH!")
We love to lay in ambush in the night!
("AAAA!")
A-rumbling! A-rumbling! The Zits were born for rumbling!
(SMAK!)
There's nothing we like better than a fight!"
(KRAK!)

Then a headlight pierced the darkness - a rider gaunt and grim,
Daystick drawn and ready in his hand.
     The chin belonged to Dredd,
     And the voice as well, which said:
"You creeps can do your rumbling in the can!"

"It's just one judge!" cried Cindy Spike and opened with her blaster -
"I'll send him back to Central in a sack!"
(SPOING! "AAAAAAA!")
But Dredd's bike absorbed the blast and laid her on the street,
With tyre marks running right across her back.

Then the judge got down to business and his daystick rose and fell,
Striking out at every head he saw.
For though the Zits launched the attack, the Sharks were fighting back -
And self defence is no defence in law!

As the heap of bodies mounted, Big Zit could see his Waterloo,
Waiting just one station down the line.
Oh, sure, he loved to rumble - but he preferred to be on top...
"Let's scram and live to fight another time!"

("Dredd to Control! We got forty-plus juve rumblers fleeing east through Bernstein. Zits and Sharks, back-up required."
"Wilco, Dredd!"
"Med squads and meat wagons to Moreng Alley. Estimate twenty casualties, more to follow."
"Control to all units area Bernstein. YPs on the run."
VRMMMM!
"Pick 'em up!")

In the space of sixty seconds there was a judge on every street.
From watching bays others scanned the slab -
"We got two Zits runnin' fast though the Tamblin Underpass!"
"Krupke here! I got 'em in the bag!"
(THUNK! THUNK!)

They cut them off at Sondheim and they mopped them up on Wood,
On Pedway 12 they corned Crazy Joseph.
He tried to make a stand - but a spear's not worth a damn,
When it's up against a judge's high explosive.

The Ghoul surrendered quietly, he didn't have much choice -
Ike the Spike tried to scale the sector wall -
("Save your bullet, he'll never make it." "Oh no! AAAAAAAAAAAAH!" SPLATT!)
The Dixon Boys all copped it when they tried to hitch a ride,
On the 2020 Zoom to Bernstein Halt.

Big Zit thought he'd play it clever, the law was everywhere,
The safest thing for him to do was hide -
Dredd tracked him down on infrared - "Don't bother to come out!"
"The best place for trash like you is inside!"

In minutes flat they'd caught them, every Shark and every Zit.
To Dredd it fell to ladle out the years -
"Twenty years apiece for Cindy Spike, Billy Rat and Ghoul."
An extra ten left Big Frank Zit in tears.

For Faceache minus half his face, for the hapless Dixon Boys,
For Ike impaled so cruelly on his spike,
For Crazy Joe with his gaping hole, there'd be one final rumble,
Along the last conveyor belt at Resyk.

A-rumbling! A-rumbling! They loved to go A-rumbling!
But the Zits will go A-rumbling no more!
A-rumbling! A-rumbling! They loved to go A-rumbling!
But they should've known they couldn't buck the law!

Brazil drought linked to Amazon deforestation - BBC News

notarobot says...

When a forest breathes in, it takes carbon out of the air. When it breathes out, it releases oxygen and moisture (which is drawn up from the ground.) If there is enough forest, the moisture actually changes the local weather conditions.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon