What you have done is excuse each and every instance where a cop blatantly goes overboard and hurts or kills a citizen, and supported the lack of prosecution, and said that how they are treated is proper, not being prosecuted, or being allowed to kill with impunity. You never strung the exact words together, only the sentiment.

No, what you do is say "if" some ridiculous thing that isn't true "then they are justified." That's your MO, and how you excuse the inexcusable every time.

The cop in front had the same amount of time to decide and the best view of anyone, and decided backing off was clearly proper...he can be heard instructing the other cop to do just that...but demolition man decided he knew better from behind....so....

Hmmm...why don't you go down to the local crack house alone and unarmed and tell them how to act? The local crack heads have more patience, sense, restraint, and will listen better.

My point is cops no longer 'put their lives on the line to protect innocent people', they put innocent people's lines on the line to protect themselves these days, and that's the problem. 10 people killed by cops for every cop killed by citizens says it all.
(drops mic)

The woman in the "experiment" is a total hypocrite. In fact, that little undercover experiment shot the credibility of everyone else's story, and the video in general.

She dressed in a way clearly meant to elicit reaction. heck she even said it was "provocative" hello, the word provocative literally means "voice call out forward" ... pro + vocare (latin for call, voice) Imagine a guy walking around with 100 bills taped all over his body, he'd be an idiot if he expected no one would look at him. If he was robbed, women would ask him .."huh why did you tape $100 bills all over you?"

The little BS hidden camera thing is clearly put on someone who's looking to find people to yell things out, for the purpose of "proving a point" and making a problem appear more serious than it is. If it happens to every day women constantly - then why not choose a woman that's dressed more "normally" ?

Obviously some of the more physical assault-like things are inexcusable, but anything else, verbal or otherwise, is just men doing what society (including women) have taught them to do: be aggressive, be bold.. why is it that...

good looking guy that calls out = man that is bold and goes after what he wants
ugly guy that calls out = creep that harasses.

And women go around wondering why "men don't understand and it's so hard to teach them..?" maybe try being a little honest and consistent for starters?

Well, maybe that sentiment is 'popular' because turn about is fair play....or because most people believe in an eye for an eye (unless it's their enemy that lost the first eye, then suddenly that idea is bad).
These theories are popular because they excuse inexcusable retaliatory behavior as long as you convince yourself you were slighted first, and work great for those with no self examination skills.

From his facebook:

"This is news to some, but many of you may have heard about the incident today at Warped Tour London. I jumped off an extremely tall lighting tress during my last song, and was taken to the hospital for examination. I was released, and I'm fine, besides some nicks, bruises, and the shame of endangering the crowd. The fall broke a girl's arm and hurt another guy. My tour manager Nils and I stayed at the hospital for 6 hours til the visiting period ended, and all I know about the man's condition at this point is that he has no breaks and the injury seems to be muscular/ bruising. I'll be going back in the morning to try to apologize, but I wouldn't blame the guy if he spits in my face. The jump was not awesome, it was not badass, and it was not ballsy. It turned what should have been a great day for the people who got hurt into a nightmare. It was stupid and wildly irresponsible, plain and simple.

I have no excuse for my actions, and the only way I can explain my mindset is that it was a huge overreach in the heat of the moment. No, I was not drunk or on drugs. I used to be a kid who was afraid to do anything physically dangerous-- I was scared of the ball in little league, didn't want to jump into lakes and would never have had the nerve to crowdsurf. But in the last year of touring, I've done increasingly risky things, maybe pushing myself by some dumb sense I am conquering my early timidity. I pride myself on trying to put on a good show and always giving 100% energy, but jumping off some high shit doesn't make someone a good musician or performer. I feel fucking terrible. I made a boneheaded decision that got people hurt, and it's extremely lucky it wasn't worse. Putting your own body on the line is one thing, but putting other people in harm's way is inexcusable. Today I let down my supporters, I let down the Warped Tour and I let down my band and the people who work their asses off behind the scenes to make these shows happen. My #1 priority right now is to somehow make this right for the folks who were hurt.

I will not be canceling the remaining 6 tour dates. I will do the shows, as usual I will meet everyone afterwards, and I will NOT be jumping off anything. I am deeply sorry and I promise to learn from this mistake."

I can't see what you claim at all...in most 'skate parks' you are allowed to skate anywhere in the park...and it certainly looks to me like they have the entire area set up for skating. He was NOT headed towards picnic tables, those are blocks set up for skating. He is running AWAY from the table area straight towards the street (on the map/link eric3579 found, thank you). You can see the tables clearly, they have benches attached. From the pavilion Mom comes from (and we all assume the child too), the child is over 1/2 way to the street, where he may have ended up if the skater didn't stop him. That skater just saved that kids life, and got sucker punched for it!! ;-}
I also completely disagree that under all circumstances it's the older person's responsibility to avoid the free running toddler bolting out from behind an object directly into your path. I don't understand why you give the toddler a free pass just because he's young...that's why he needed supervision. That's why I say it was nearly entirely the MOTHER'S fault, for not watching her child in a dangerous area, then blaming others when something expected happens.
When you say things like 'her reaction was pretty normal' it implies clearly that it's acceptable. It was not acceptable in any way.
edit: A better way to say it might be 'her reaction was unacceptable, but understandable from someone with no self control'.
After the first punch/shove, he should have raised the board as a shield, then swung it like a club when she kept coming. There's no excuse for her behavior.
I am often surprised at the lack of self control many have, and the excuses others want to make for their inexcusable behavior.
If you're the type of irresponsible parent that lets their child run free unattended and unwatched in dangerous public areas where others are doing dangerous things in a manner and place prescribed by law and you get violently angry at others when the predictable happens, I think you're an idiot and should have your child taken from you. That's a typical problem with most parents, reason and responsibility goes out the window when it comes to their child.

Since 99.9% of "Christians" use the old testament to validate their hatred and distain for others, it's totally reasonable to use it to shame and deride them. Those who call themselves "christian" are far less likely to follow the teachings of Jebus, and more likely to use religion to play their gottcha game and excuse the inexcusable.
As an atheist, I have repeatedly and consistently been told I'm a better christian than any actual christian the religious speakers know. How sad is that? It kind of blows the "morality comes from religion" or "god" argument out of the water.

>> ^Mikus_Aurelius:

Except it will be infected by stupid DRM.


As long as all of the AI runs locally and it's only sending statistics, at least the performance won't be damaged by a poor connection, the way it is with Diablo 3. Still, the DRM is inexcusable, but not D3 bad; they've set a very high bar.

Without suggesting an alternative bill focused on improving the plight of struggling American's, RIP-ublicans clearly have their heads up their @%%&%. If they don't have to do anything to make Obama look bad, then why are Reps fighting so hard to do it? Worse yet, why do they do it at the expense of their own constituents?

It is childish, vindictive and inexcusable that they knowingly take steps to plunge the country into further ruin to score some more fear votes.

An excellent question. The answer is, Japan has a religion, and that religion is Japan itself (nationalism). Yes, Shinto is there, but AFAIK, it's mostly ceremonial.

The Japanese have a very strong family-oriented culture with clearly defined roles and a nearly homogenous society. They also have a concept of honor unheard of in the West. Disgracing one's family name by stealing or rioting would be inexcusable.

Unfortunately, the Japanese are, IMO, still too trusting of authority in times of crisis.

I never claimed that Christianity is the only way to instill values, but because a tenet of generic Christianity is that it's the "ONLY" way, I can see why one might think so.

When God is "killed" the State becomes God, and a murderous one at that. The only majority atheist countries spared mass slaughter have traditionally religious cultures or strict cultural values. Right now England has neither, and because the population is unarmed, they are subjects of the crown, not citizens.


>> ^SDGundamX:

>> ^quantumushroom:
I agree with this guy 99%. He is not a cock. Of course, watching an atheist angered by a lack of morality in the populace is hilarious. People didn't regularly act this way 40 years ago. What changed?
Not everyone proclaiming to be a Christian follows Thou shalt not steal all the time, but more of them have values than the ones raised with....NOTHING.
Sorry Atheists, without those funny Bible stories/sermons/morality plays, you have no vehicle to deliver your values, which oddly mirror Christian values in so many ways.

Riots don't happen in Japan, either--a country where less than 1% of the population is Christian. Don't you think the Japanese have 1000 times more reasons to riot than these guys? Many people in the tsunami hit areas are still living in school gyms, without air conditioning in 90+ degree weather. They have no work, no homes, and not a whole lot of hope. Meanwhile, a 20km radius in Fukushima is uninhabitable and will likely remain that way for the foreseeable future. The people who used to live there are basically homeless--they can't claim insurance on their homes because technically their homes haven't been destroyed. And it's not just people in northern Japan that are being affected--radioactive food is "accidentally" getting through inspections and being consumed by the general populace.
Most have never heard of the ten commandments here. 80% of the population are atheist. Yet there are no riots, no looting, no violent demonstrations. People are angry, but they are working peacefully towards solutions to the problems through grassroots campaigns. So my question for you is, how do you reconcile these facts with your belief that only Christianity can instill morality in people?

>> ^Skeeve:

I still consider the US government's actions in this matter inexcusable.

So what's new?

>> ^Skeeve:

If he dies, I'm sure I wont be the only one who will consider it the execution of a Canadian by the American government for a non-existent crime.
I've never smoked pot in my life, and have no intentions to, but I still consider the US government's actions in this matter inexcusable.


Hear, Hear!

If he dies, I'm sure I wont be the only one who will consider it the execution of a Canadian by the American government for a non-existent crime.

I've never smoked pot in my life, and have no intentions to, but I still consider the US government's actions in this matter inexcusable.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^marbles:
>> ^theali:
Yep, this is why these oppressive regimes don't allow reporters to cover the events. Its easy to dismiss citizen journalism and question its authenticity. Both Iran and Syria kicked out all international reporters right before the crackdown.
Well to be fair, I'm pretty sure they kicked out all foreigners. Can't really blame them when Foreign Intelligence members are the main instigators of the rebellions.

Your statements are utterly disgusting Marbles. I don't care if you honestly believe the propaganda garbage being spewed by Bashir Al-Assad's government or not. The last time a revolution was tried in Syria, his father went to war with the Muslim brotherhood(not a gang the west is liable to use as a loving proxy) and the Syrian army turned nearly an entire town into a parking lot to demonstrate their 'point'.
Go listen to the accounts of the thousands of Syrian refugees in Turkey who fled the Military onslaught against civilians. Bashir Al-Assad's special forces executed nearly 120 army soldiers when the refused to fire on unarmed civilians.
It's is simply disgusting and inexcusable to defend the horrific onslaught against civilians that Syria is pursuing, even if you do loath America and deem it as the great Satan responsible for all the world's ills, in what world does that make it ok for Syria's army to go around killing unarmed civilians in massive numbers????????

I'm sorry you feel that way. I find it really disgusting you have to make me into something I'm not so you can attack me. I didn't say anything about killing unarmed civilians. The truth is we don't know who is killing the civilians. And for you to get so emotionally invested in it is foolish. BTW The Muslim brotherhood was started by British Intelligence. When you own both sides of the conflict, you always win.
I don't hate America, but I do hate the power elite that use the US government to be economic hit-men all around the world. Don't be fooled. That is exactly what is going on in North Africa/Middle East.


The truth is we don't know who is killing the civilians.

That IS disgusting. We do know who is killing them. The refugees that have succeeded in fleeing to Turkey are telling us it was Assad's troops killing them. The SAME Assad that kicked out all journalists that didn't work directly for him. Defectors who've fled to Turkey have similarly reported witnessing first hand that Assad's secret service executed Syrian soldiers that refused orders to fire upon unarmed civilians.

We KNOW who is killing who. Your refusal to acknowledge it is sick.

>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^marbles:
>> ^theali:
Yep, this is why these oppressive regimes don't allow reporters to cover the events. Its easy to dismiss citizen journalism and question its authenticity. Both Iran and Syria kicked out all international reporters right before the crackdown.
Well to be fair, I'm pretty sure they kicked out all foreigners. Can't really blame them when Foreign Intelligence members are the main instigators of the rebellions.

Your statements are utterly disgusting Marbles. I don't care if you honestly believe the propaganda garbage being spewed by Bashir Al-Assad's government or not. The last time a revolution was tried in Syria, his father went to war with the Muslim brotherhood(not a gang the west is liable to use as a loving proxy) and the Syrian army turned nearly an entire town into a parking lot to demonstrate their 'point'.
Go listen to the accounts of the thousands of Syrian refugees in Turkey who fled the Military onslaught against civilians. Bashir Al-Assad's special forces executed nearly 120 army soldiers when the refused to fire on unarmed civilians.
It's is simply disgusting and inexcusable to defend the horrific onslaught against civilians that Syria is pursuing, even if you do loath America and deem it as the great Satan responsible for all the world's ills, in what world does that make it ok for Syria's army to go around killing unarmed civilians in massive numbers????????


I'm sorry you feel that way. I find it really disgusting you have to make me into something I'm not so you can attack me. I didn't say anything about killing unarmed civilians. The truth is we don't know who is killing the civilians. And for you to get so emotionally invested in it is foolish. BTW The Muslim brotherhood was started by British Intelligence. When you own both sides of the conflict, you always win.
I don't hate America, but I do hate the power elite that use the US government to be economic hit-men all around the world. Don't be fooled. That is exactly what is going on in North Africa/Middle East.

>> ^marbles:

>> ^theali:
Yep, this is why these oppressive regimes don't allow reporters to cover the events. Its easy to dismiss citizen journalism and question its authenticity. Both Iran and Syria kicked out all international reporters right before the crackdown.
Well to be fair, I'm pretty sure they kicked out all foreigners. Can't really blame them when Foreign Intelligence members are the main instigators of the rebellions.


Your statements are utterly disgusting Marbles. I don't care if you honestly believe the propaganda garbage being spewed by Bashir Al-Assad's government or not. The last time a revolution was tried in Syria, his father went to war with the Muslim brotherhood(not a gang the west is liable to use as a loving proxy) and the Syrian army turned nearly an entire town into a parking lot to demonstrate their 'point'.

Go listen to the accounts of the thousands of Syrian refugees in Turkey who fled the Military onslaught against civilians. Bashir Al-Assad's special forces executed nearly 120 army soldiers when the refused to fire on unarmed civilians.

It's is simply disgusting and inexcusable to defend the horrific onslaught against civilians that Syria is pursuing, even if you do loath America and deem it as the great Satan responsible for all the world's ills, in what world does that make it ok for Syria's army to go around killing unarmed civilians in massive numbers????????