Perhaps not directly, but you certainly implied it by saying they would arrest you for just not talking.(Edit: I took that as an endorsement)

Again, you simply don't understand rights if you say it's ridiculous, uncalled-for behavior to actually exercise them, which is precisely what she did.

1 1/2 years on duty is not inexperienced or rookie IMO.
EDIT: Nor is being inexperienced or a rookie any excuse for violating civil rights....it's sad that I think that needs to be stated explicitly.

Exercising your legal right to not say a word, because saying any word has PROVEN REPEATEDLY to be enough to cause exactly the kind of trouble you say she's inviting by being silent, is absolutely NOT instigation. It is being patriotic and standing up for your hard won rights. My forefathers actually fought and died to secure those rights, it is my duty to defend them by using them, as is the case with every American citizen. Period. (I am inflexible in this line of thought, as it conforms to everything I was taught to believe about citizenship, patriotism, and respect)

Before they manhandle her, she tells them she's a lawyer and has no duty to speak....enough? If not, why?


You said "I don't think saying "hello, how are you?" and "no, I don't know why you pulled me over." are going to incriminate you...", I explained why you are wrong in that assessment (as did others by pointing you to a video that explains it in detail and much better than I can). There's no question, it's not an opinion, it's historical, verifiable fact. Talking to police can get you in more trouble than remaining silent, but I do agree it's prudent to explain to powertripping ignorant cops what's happening....with a pre-printed card you let them read through your closed window that simply says "Any questioning must be in the presence of my lawyer, and I won't respond, standing on my constitutional right to refuse any self incrimination." or something close to that. I'm usually willing to simply and flatly say " I can't talk to you without my attorney" and they go away, but that's because I'm a pussy.

self *promote what I think is an important piece of this story.
If there was nothing to hide, why do they keep lying under oath about their repeated pre-election contact with Russian diplomats?

I keep wondering, how is there any question for anyone about Trump and Russia colluding? He did it in public, specifically and clearly asking Putin directly to hack the DNC and Clinton's emails and release them, which Russia then did in short order, in a nationally broadcast speech. There is absolutely no way around it, he asked for Russian intervention in the election publicly during the campaign, and he got exactly what he asked them for.....then the right elected him. WTF?!?

The terrifying part to me is, now that Sessions is AG, he and others could direct the feds to destroy the evidence of the collusion, or have it classified so we'll never hear about it without some brave soul willing to risk a treason charge themselves, and as someone under investigation for Russian collusion himself, he is the person heading the investigation into the Russian involvement. He should be at least put on leave if not removed immediately to preclude him from using his power to stymie and destroy the case against himself and his cronies.
A special prosecutor is needed badly, ASAP, since every member of the Trump team seems to be firmly involved in this treason, and they've clearly shown a willingness to lie about it under oath to congress. Without the recordings of what they actually said, which exist, they can and already have made up any ridiculous BS lies they like and their base will accept it as fact....even after irrefutable proof that they're lying is produced, they'll just call it "fake news" because they don't like the source or information.

I lurked for over a year here before I started posting but found that once I did any questions I had were readily answered by other sifters. If you can get to the late night talk show clips before others, it's a good way to move up. Otherwise, I personally frequent a couple other sites that other sifters don't seem to go to. Other than that, I type in keywords on YT then filter out older results. I get a lot of misses, but every now and then I find something that's unique. Plus I get to see a lot of foreign stuff I never would have otherwise.

"About
I like to thanks to anyone who managed to come on this page. The site was a review site catering horror movies and other films alike. The community I hope to build will share and gained thoughts and opinions of latest and recent movies they have seen or will be seen. Please message me if you have any question to ask at   michaeljones021984@gmail.com  ."

michaeljones *ban

I make reasonable allowances for what I will call a hero, I never made allowances for what's a legal right. I think one need not exercise one's rights in the most disruptive way possible to exorcize them. That said, if the restaurant owner in your scenario doesn't want to kick out open carry people for scaring 'families', that should be their right too, and then they're (the owner and the carrier) both slightly heroic.

In this case, if he's doing nothing illegal, the cops should go do something productive, not get violent because someone is guilty of contempt of cop, which is not a crime. They always say they're understaffed and there's too much crime to deal with, then why are 2 cops wasting so much time on someone legally not answering their questions or producing ID AND NOTHING ELSE WRONG? That seems impractical in the extreme.

There is a HUGE difference between behavior that, while allowed, is bound to scare some people and/or cause panic and behavior that simply annoys a public servant who's abusing their authority in the first place, not actually doing their job. No one can reasonably be afraid for their life of someone that won't answer their questions, nor is it a crime. No crowd has ever run in panic because a mime (or group of mimes) walked into it's midst....maybe in disgust, but not panic.

It is always appropriate, practical, socially accepted, and constructive to your life to tell any officer that you won't answer any question at all (including 'what's your name' if that's legal in your state) without written blanket immunity from the DA, notarized and codified by a judge, for any and all crimes you may have committed or may be committing...and not a word more without a good lawyer present. That's the advice both my father's and brother's high priced lawyers gave me, I'll take it.

So, it's not the lying cop that's confrontational in your eyes?
We know she lied about seeing him because she doesn't give him a 'smoking in public' ticket, which I'm 99.99999% certain she would have written if she had actually seen him smoking.

I agree, he handled it badly, but I say he handled it badly because he spoke to the cop at all.

It is NOT in your best interest to remain cooperative with a cop....EVER. If they ask you a question, it's only asked to find a crime to charge you with. ANY question you answer is enough for them to lie and say 'he sounded drunk/high/angry/slow/like he was lying' and continue interrogating and investigating you, or just plain arrest you, then claim you said something completely different (prime example: see this video where she claims he never said he didn't smoke, although the video proves he DID say he never smoked in his life, but cops are all 'professionally' trained liars and most will lie about you to find something to charge you with). Don't give them a thing to twist into something to investigate or charge you with...not a god damn word. If you say nothing, they can't twist it into something actionable.

Thank you Eric!
This is that movie that I went to Belize to make a couple years back. Finally available for free to the public after its run at the festivals! Please enjoy and have a beautiful Earth Day, 'sift!
Happy to answer any questions, of course.
*promote

There's a possibility that it's not a "rogue site" but rather a malware on your machine sending the information to a 3rd party. Make sure you don't have any questionable addons in your browser, or weird programs installed (check add/remove programs in your control panel).

The moment you banish God...eye-eating creatures cease to exist?

What we have here is a failure to understand. Why is anyone asking this pseudo-intellectual any questions at all? You can't expect much in the way of profundity. He's a performer. He's an ex-con. I'll grant his intelligence, but intelligence won't get you that far.

Ask someone who spends his life in meditation and you will find far greater answers. Ask Krishnamurti or Tolle or just about any one else. Why are you wasting time with an actor of all people?

Believe it or not, I think I was already wondering about those type of topics at that age (as I had always been a HUGE space and science fan, I knew by age "3" essentially that I wanted to be an Astronaut; which I'm sure my parents got a kick out of).

However, here is the problem with asking that/those type of questions (as I believe many people have more than likely been down this road). The community and the adults around you shape parts of your reality AND how you decide to continue to ask or answer that question(s). In my case, the problem was: religion. The answer to ALL my questions back then were: religion...

It wasn't until I was around 16 that I became highly suspicious and then began to bring up ALL of these questions I had "thought" WERE answered...but, they weren't at all. Finally by the age of 18 (into 19) I had shaken off the chains of religion that had held me down and to this day I have to wonder what would have become of me, what COULD have become of me, if I had an educated answer to my questions and not merely the answer that is given by those that don't know (a.k.a., I hate to say it, but it IS true: the stupid or ignorant people).

Religion DID, however, give me answers to some things I couldn't have gotten anywhere else. But, in the long run I must admit that--while a small amount of good came from it--it truly didn't out-weigh the tremendous amount of damage that had been done to me (as I bet others can attest to this being true for them as well). I was forced to go backwards through my entire life and then question myself on everything I believed and stood for, including "facts" and other such things that science uses as foundational elements--but, religion uses belief in the same manner as "facts" (as we were taught in some cases to say that we "knew" or "know" that something is true, rather than using "believe", "thought", or had "faith"...pretty shady right?!). This took a very long time, years on end, to finally "un-clutter" my mind.

Now I'm left wondering how well I would have done without all that nonsense pored into my mind DAILY (as I attended seminar...).

So I appreciate Neil's answer here in many ways. He is telling this kid to explore the world around him and to some degree, don't obey everything you are told (so long as it isn't dangerous). He is absolutely right. I merely wish I had people that told me the same things. As I didn't get "this idea" until FAR later in life (since my mind becomes "infatuated" with questions and ideas, getting the religious answer to my questions prompted me to literally think of everything possible within the religion to make things work "logically", and I was very much "zealot" like...because as I said, these questions consume me, so I cannot help but BE a "zealot")...

But, eventually I had a Physics class and that re-opened everything. I started to ask those questions again and NOW I found a new answer to what I had previously been told. The huge difference this time was: facts and proof; and also that it is all derived from logic. Physics was essentially undeniable. You could not refute it, because this was how we made things work around the world--via engineering--the math within it is used to control, make, and imagine anything you wish to engineer (or if you wish to do an experiment). I already had major issues with religion, but I was making logical "excuses" to make it work. But, with this huge influx of knowledge everything changed (how I wish we would have had Physics in Junior High; why do we not...don't we want engineers?).

I hate to add religion into this topic, but I thought it good to point out that this kid may be heavily influenced by Neil. This conversation that Neil directs towards him may end up being one of the most important events in his life. Just as mine was when I asked certain questions, I received religious based answers...practically deciding the path I would take...at least while I was a child/kid. But, had I been a slightly more stupid or just ignorant person, then I would still, right now, believe fully in religion.

So, when a child asks you ANY question like this do not joke around about it--while it is cute, you must remember that YOU are shaping their future and their destiny...

/lengthy

True story.

Went to the presentation at school, at night. All the boys went one night, the girls on another. Fifth and sixth graders, but my mom took me as a fourth grader, my brother went as a fifth grader.

After both of us had seen the presentation, my parents sat with us in the backyard. Asked if we had any questions.

I had one. "How does the sperm get across the bed? Does it crawl?"

They showed all the apparatus, but they never told us the delivery method!

My parents didn't answer then. My dad tried to tell me later. Always at dinner time, which was weird.

I learned by then that this was something not to be discussed (picked that up from my parents, clearly!) Dad would try to tell me, I would squeal and run upstairs.

My father is not a patient man.

One night, he leaned over and unplugged the toaster. "Gale, in electrical terms, this is the male and this is the female." And he plugged in the toaster.

I squealed and ran, but the info was transmitted.

Stupid Disney movie didn't tell us.

This was in 1963.

While there is nothing wrong with talking about this stuff with kids, other than making a funny video, it's not really neccesary to talk about sex with kids this age.
Absolutely, answer any questions they may have, but you can wait until they are 8-9-10 to talk about this stuff... just before puberty.

I'm not saying to hide it from them, but to sit them down for "The Talk" at this age is a little silly. If they are showing signs of knowing stuff, and you want them to have the right information, you can ask small questions that will give away how much they know and you can steer them in the right direction.

In the end, it IS the parent's prerogative though.
Don't scare your kids though

Not answering questions is not being confrontational or an asshole when the questioner's only motivation is to find a 'problem' he can 'solve' by charging you with a crime. My sense of self preservation demands that I have a lawyer present during any questioning, and that I have written immunity before giving any answers. It's not being rude, it's being safe, EDIT: and it's honoring the enormous sacrifices made by my and other's ancestors in order to create and preserve the right to remain silent, ignoring/foregoing that or any other hard won right is a slap in their faces IMO.

Interactions with the police and normal person to person interactions are governed by a different set of rules.

Once the cop could see that there was absolutely no issue, why did he continue with the stop and demand ID and insurance if he was being a 'good guy cop, just trying to help'? That action denies the 'good guy' premise.

you posted a self-link which is a huge no-no here on the sift.
this is a video aggregate site which promotes the work of others for their quality and other redeeming qualities.which are then voted on by the community.

usually most self-likers never bother to check back but since you are here..allow me to suggest that you ask another sifter to post this video and hence avoiding the inevitable ban hammer.

any questions that you have can be found in the faqs section,or just ask another sifter.we are usually a pretty helpful bunch.

never mind.seems @newtboy already addressed the situation far better than i could.

scientism is really like truthieness. It's a made up word, with a made up definition, that has no bearing on, or connection to reality.
Science is not about belief.
If data 'proves' that science can't ever answer any question about reality (not about human insanity, although it already goes a long way towards explaining that too), scientists would concede instantly. If it were a belief, they could never change it based on evidence, but science does change.

No one is asking you to 'bow' to any 'theory'. They are simply the 'rules' that 'science' has produced to explain how the world/universe works. They work just fine without your 'belief' in them or knowledge of them. That's just one thing they have over the supernatural.

Please give an example or two of scientific 'truths' that were half baked ideas. I think if you look throughout history, carefully, you will see the scientific method was developed mostly around the 12th century as explained here:

Amongst the array of great scholars, al-Haytham is regarded as the architect of the scientific method. His scientific method involved the following stages:1.Observation of the natural world
2.Stating a definite problem
3.Formulating a robust hypothesis
4.Test the hypothesis through experimentation
5.Assess and analyze the results
6.Interpret the data and draw conclusions
7.Publish the findings

but it's widely held that it was not solidified to the modern scientific method (eliminating guessing and 'induction' and requiring repeatable experimentation) until Newton. That means any example you might give should come after 1660 or so at the earliest, or you aren't talking about the same "science" that the rest of us are.

I think most scientist would say it is 'possible' that supernatural events happen, but incredibly unlikely, and constantly less so the more we know about the world and it's rules. It's just as likely that if I only eat the right color yellow foods I'll eventually 'magically' crap gold. I can't prove it won't happen (because I'll never know if I ate the 'right' color foods, if I ever tried), but I can use science to show it's absolutely unlikely to a NEAR certainty (no matter how one misunderstands quantum physics).
The supernatural is right there with my golden poops....and I can't tell which smells worse.