I always have a tendency to think "let's not be hasty" when considering stuff like this. There's always (at least) two sides to every story.

For example, with Philando Castile (man shot in the car):
He *did* have a gun in the car.
His girlfriend said that he told the officer about it and did not do anything threatening at all, but there is/was at least *some* potential that the cops would tell a different story.
The video of the event didn't show how things escalated, so we have to figure it out based on the reports of two potentially biased reports -- the girlfriend/family and the police.

Honestly, that was enough to look quite bad for the police, BUT my "don't be hasty" tendencies were still in play.


And now, we've got this. Like @newtboy has been saying, I just can't fathom the level of incompetence required to make this an "oops" situation. If they were trying to shoot the autistic man and missed and hit Kinsey by mistake ... that's fucked up.

A) If they were trying to "protect" Kinsey, how about listening to him? Did he sound nervous, like he needed protecting? NO. He calmly explained the entire situation, and was obviously NOT afraid of the autistic guy doing him any harm. And this time, they've got a lot of the lead-up on video, so we can actually hear him explain the situation. Any cop (or anyone) with 2 brain cells to rub together would holster their firearm if they listened to his explanation. Maybe they would stay behind cover and let Kinsey either talk the autistic guy into dropping the toy truck in his hand or let him get up and show them clearly that it was not a weapon (since they were responding to a report about someone possibly having a gun), but there's clearly no need to keep the guns aimed on either of them -- and Kinsey told them as much.

B) If they were trying to "protect" him, then why did they cuff him? With 3 sets of cuffs, apparently. After shooting, once they approached and figured out that there was no weapon, any decent human being would jump into action to try to mitigate the fallout of their dumbass mistake. Don't cuff the guy you "accidentally" shot -- call for an ambulance, try to stop the bleeding, etc.


For fucks sake, if that is the story the police are coming up with to explain / defend (hah!) their actions, it is just utterly pathetic. Charge the shooter and the entire police department with something criminal, and throw the law book at every single one of them. My normally strong "let's not be hasty" impulse is looking at this entire mess with a double /facepalm.

Very glad that Mr. Kinsey is expected to fully recover. Maybe the silver lining beyond his survival will be that an event this blatant almost has to force us to acknowledge that there is a serious problem with how our police are operating.

I had to stop watching. Yeah. Nothing to do with feminism.

As for saying that if you hit someone once, that person has the right to beat you senseless?

No. No, that is not true.

I know that men do that to men. And it is wrong when they do it to each other. That is very definition of poor impulse control. (And to sneak into feminist territory -- men who say "she made me do it" as an excuse for beating up their significant others? I suspect that behavior can be traced back, in part, to the beat downs and humiliations they received early in life, including from men.)

This is called the cycle of violence and has nothing to do with the true face of gender equality.

I guess that's where we differ.

I find it funny precisely because such things really happen.

In a world where no such cruelty exists, I think this kind of material would then become empty and pointless. Comedy thrives on the defiance of our misery.

I dare say it would get less of a laugh in Sweden for this very reason.

I'm clearly in the minority here, but then I suspect few people have developed the same sense of cynical detachment I have (working with the severely mentally I'll and dieing will do that to you).

The humour is definitely there, I guess you just need a suitably fucked up perspective to appreciate it.

Out of curiosity, did you find Jim's old bit about the child getting shot when he was in Iraq funny? I might suggest that is an even more cruel and fucked up situation than the subject matter being discussed here.

Would that only become funny when children are no longer victims of wars? Or is it funny precisely because of the incomprehensible cruelty and misfortune underlying it?

Perhaps you have an easier time detaching yourself from something that isn't as likely to happen to you? This seems reasonable, but I don't see how it precludes such material from being funny, only more challenging for one to engage with. (and thus more powerful if one can do so)

To bring in a thread from another reply "And this is the brilliance of Louis -- that he lays bare the humanity of even pedophiles. The truth of pedophiles."

In what sense is Jim not doing the same thing here? He is flippantly exploring Cosby's desire to victimise women, we all have desires and sometimes act on those impulses when we shouldn't.
Rape is an extreme example, but the thought process is ultimately the same thing writ large. "I want a thing I can't have, but I'm doing it anyway".
I might argue he is laying bare the universal human condition in just the same way, albeit with something closer to home for most people than paedophilia.

Presumably it's the other thread that's proving challenging, i.e. the masochistic idea of enjoying ones abuse? And again, there is something deeply fucked up at the heat of the human condition here. Deriving pleasure from victim hood, or having messed up priorities about fame and opportunity.
Stockholm syndrome, abused partners loving their spouses, groupies allowing themselves to be abused just to be near their idols.

We are really that fucked up as a species sometimes, cognitive dissonance is almost a way of life for most of us in our own little ways. It's clearly a deeply risque subject, but there is something dark at the core of the human condition there none the less.

The actual victims don't need to have the kind of mixed up priorities Jim is alluding to, we only have to recognise that we posses the capacity for that dissonance ourselves. (The joke being at the expense of our own inherent hypocrisies, not specific victims)

The only big difference I can really see is that child rape is much rarer than the kind being discussed here. (and thus I suppose easier for most to detach themselves from)

Is it really any less horrific? Surely if anything it is far more terrible for most victims and usually seems to cause more damage to their lives.

How does Louis's material on Child rape remain funny in a world where children are raped, yet Jim's material about women being raped only become funny in a world where they do not get raped?

Paedophiles have a culture too. They form groups, exchange materials, praise each others work etc. etc. Not to mention grooming rings and other such reprehensible things.

I understand that a particular subject can strike too close to home, but for me that was my failing to rise above my own fears and traumas. When I finally got to a place where I could laugh at my own victim hood, it was one of the most liberating experiences of my life. (Don't get me wrong, that shit never completely goes away)

There is actually an argument that our brains are three due to the way the frontal cortex works. (not the "triune brain" which is a different idea)

The frontal part can exercise control over the two hemispheres and is about as close as we have gotten to identifying where free will comes from. Certainly, in people who have had frontal brain damage there appears to be a direct link to lack of impulse control.
Almost every serial killer in history appears to have had some manner of frontal brain trauma at some stage in their lives and the link to delinquency is fairly well documented by this stage.

The latest research suggests consciousness itself is a fractal programme running co-operatively across the brain, but it remains pretty obscure none the less. The frontal cortex is split between left and right hemispheres, but it certain appears to behave as one in healthy brains.

The best way I could describe it is that the left and right represent the animistic unconsidered side of our behaviour and desires as we see in most animals (interacting via the corpus callosum that connects them). With the frontal cortex seeming to represent the higher functions that allow us to harness the rest of our brain in more considered and abstract ways (presumably also split into left and right).

I think of it like the foreman directing the other divisions of the factory but staying largely hands off when considered decisions don't need to be made.

All of the above is a gross oversimplification though. We can guess at the basis for free will, but it remains elusive.

I wonder if the IQ/height deficit of pedophiles is influenced by the bias of selecting for pedophiles who act on their impulses and are caught indicating a lack of mental development or impulse control.

It almost sounds like he is suggesting to keep an open mind and learn about other cultures, religions & mythology in order to understand those perspectives; and overall to be humble to the mystery: that we do not know.

In my opinion some of his opinions were a little contradictory - he doesn't believe in any sort of god or gods, but it seems that a wiser statement would be that he doesn't know, which would correspond with the "I don't believe in atheists" theme.

Furthermore, I honestly don't think that those who (in Hedges' words), "do not explore the religious impulse" are inhuman. Even if someone never explores it in their lifetime. In my opinion - the late bloomers who have disconnected themselves from all inclination of organized religion or spirituality, to find it on their own later in life might have a few more advantages than those that did not disconnect themselves from it at some point.

My personal preference is that I do believe in god because I want to believe in god. Whether it's a metaphor, completely abstract energy, a point in spacetime, a massive intelligent energy field that existed long before the big-bang, a life-force found only on Earth or the Milky Way or a fucking super mega alien technological consciousness program experiment or even a microscopic white dude flying on a microscopic magic carpet or all of the above and none of the above. I just believe even though my version of whatever creation/god is, is completely unidentifiable, it's everything and it's nothing.

I think I can see where he's coming from with this, and the more open forms of racism there is an honesty that does seem less insidious. Open racism, like a fire in your house is not something you want, but at least you can see the problem right away and begin to address it (get the fuck out of the house!). But that more subtle form of racism is more like radon gas, can't see it, can't smell it, but it's slowly killing your ass (I feel terrible, I think I'll lie down and take a nap).

In America I think we've been living under the delusion that racism is a thing of the past, especially after electing a black President, but then we see how most of the racism has simply gone underground. And so, all that outwardly PC behavior is just for show, you can change how people act on the outside, but they're still the same on the inside and quietly act on those impulses, the rot is still there.

His examples of dirty jokes weren't even really genuine racism, amongst certain groups (guys in particular) razzing, busting your balls and such is usually a sign of acceptance and sometimes it takes on racial or ethnic tones, but with no real malice.

The decision not to show Carmen at the Sydney Opera House sounds like a classic case of PC overreach, how does not showing Carmen actually serve the anti-smoking cause? Let's ask how many kids started smoking because they saw that scene in Carmen? It's an absolutely useless and pointless gesture.

There are many different models of addiction, what we know is not necessarily 'wrong', it's just not complete, and one model (of addiction) certainly doesn't apply to everyone. Some people lack impulse control, some people learn addictive behaviour patterns socially, some people use addictive substances to fill an emptiness inside themselves.

So I guess the point is that both the experiments provided useful information about addiction, but this video does provide some really good insight into the flaws of the first one, and links well with the quite horrific prison situation in the US.

These people are most likely suffering from poorly developed / shrunken frontal lobes, leading to diminished impulse control. Possibly the result of a bad social environment during their formative years. Fortunately, the damage is in most cases reversible, with therapy, medication and gradual exposure to offending stimuli.

*This diagnosis has been brought to you by your friendly, neighbourhood sea urchin.

Yikes was my first impulse to use as a caption.

Thank you very much for the (*)quality!

WHATEVER!!! This is such bullshit. To suggest that this kid was not profiled--at least to some degree--is absolute nonsense. Once, I told a kid I was going to come to school and shoot him with a gun. I was young, impulsive, and angry. Not something I'm proud of, to say the least. But it was WAY worse than this kid did. And this was in a public school in FLORIDA.

Know what? I got a stern TALKING TO by the principal. A quiet, no-nonsense conversation behind closed doors. That's it.

Guess what race I am (not).

The suffragettes weren't feminists. If you want to honour the beginnings of the modern push for sex equality, then you owe your allegiance to such thinkers as John Locke, Jeremy Bentham and JS Mill - none of whom was a feminist. The entire first wave of feminism is a revisionist fiction.

This is on a par with the hideous christian impulse to annex and purloin all good behaviour into itself - "christian driver", "do the christian thing", "christian decency". So too, feminism appropriates every historical social advance in order to declare that, axiomatically, all female freedom ultimately derives from its doctrine, without which women would be slaves of the constantly threatening patriarchy.

In reality feminism is a phenomenon of the sixties - that's the nineteen sixties - with roots stretching back no more than a decade or two; which did a substantial amount of useful work in spite of its many aesthetic and ideological flaws, and which has now essentially petered out to be supplanted by, god help us, the advent of the filthy third wave and its hordes of ranting SJWs.

i'm curious how much different this would sound with impulse reverb sampled from the same locations.

The cop has been cleared of all criminal charges, sending the message that if you're threatening to commit suicide, the cops will be glad to oblige and try to kill you and suffer no consequence for (attempted) homicide whatsoever.
Also sending the message that running down a human being at full throttle is an acceptable police tactic against a suspect that's already surrounded rather than trying ANY less lethal method.

New video shows that the man was holding the gun to his own chin, and newly released information shows that he didn't use the gun to commit crimes, he stole the gun at Walmart right before the video and only fired it into the air once (perhaps to unload it? More likely to prove it's loaded.).

It's getting really old, Mr. Po-po, and turnabout's considered fair play. You might think about that, and the fact that 10% of Americans are armed and have severe impulse control issues.

I had that same reaction. I felt odd the entire time that she's just standing there like a slab of beef for them to look at and touch. "Look at this thing we brought out for you. Do you like it? Do you want to touch it? Oh, by the way, it happens to be a person, so treat it like a fragile little thing that you might break please."

It's a demonstration of human nature, really. That's exactly how human men are genetically encoded to treat women. But I am preferential to cultures and humans that seek to elevate human behavior beyond blindly or happily submitting to every animal instinct/impulse that oozes out of the brain.

Otherwise, you're just an animal that happens to walk upright.