Bovine milk from a happy cow that eats grass and lives in a field with good, appropriate medical care, like the one's we raised and the one's I visited last week, yum.

Your hyperbole is showing. You lower awareness with that kind of lie...that all animals are mistreated so all animal products are products of torture. It's bullshit, you know it's bullshit, and you just keep on spouting it. I'll keep on contradicting it. That's the deal.

Sorry, you missed the mark. I take lies, any lies, as an attack on humanity. You are lying. It's not because it's a personal or family attack, but that is the reason I have the personal knowledge to discredit you thoroughly. I actually hate the relative with the goat farm and would love to see her lose her shirt, but I admit she is an excellent animal caregiver...to the point where she often sleeps in the goat pen (outside in Texas Hill country) with them for their comfort and safety.
I have nothing to sell, I'm not invested in it at all beyond my home garden/subsistence farm. I buy my meats, but I buy good quality, properly cared for meat, not Burgerking, because I care about quality and animals. There are certainly abuses in farming, but they are the exception rather than the rule, contrary to your position. I have the extensive personal experience to say that comfortably.

EDIT: Buying LCD products is what causes the abuses you complain about. Quality products are not made as cheaply as possible, so do not have the issues you claim all animal products are tainted with. You know this.

Well, the level of incompetence required for this to be 'accidental' is SOOO incredibly high that it's not reasonable to assume the police are that incompetent....but if they are, that's intentional on the part of their supervisors, no? So still the responsibility of the police as a whole.

There IS doubt that they could have killed him and made it look unintentional. He shot 3 times, and only hit once. Clearly, he's not a good enough shot to kill on the first shot, because cops ALWAYS shoot to kill, and he failed, no matter which target he was aiming at.

We can assume that because he said "I don't know" when asked why he shot the caregiver....not "I missed", or "I wasn't aiming at you" or any other mitigation. If, as you suggest, he was firing at the sitting, unarmed, severely mentally challenged man (also completely inexcusable, btw) then the negligence in discharging his firearm with an innocent victim between him and the target is not just gross negligence, it's intentional negligence. Shooting someone because you don't care that they are between you and your target makes you an attempted murderer. Period.

Um....if a cop was shot in the foot, medical care would be instant, there would be no handcuffing, much less TRIPPLE handcuffing. What was reported was they didn't call for medical attention for >15 minutes while the victim lay handcuffed bleeding in the street (probably with officers standing on top of him). Medical care was provided while the shootings were still happening in Dallas, so "the scene wasn't secured yet, we couldn't allow medics in safely" falls completely flat as an excuse anymore and won't even be considered by me.

That level of incompetence from a police officer MUST, by definition, be intentional. They are well trained and equipped to avoid exactly this kind of fiasco. Ignoring that training is intentional, and that must be prosecutable if there is to be any effect. I don't have to ascribe intent to murder to claim culpability. That is not the metric by which the law is applied. If your actions are grossly negligent and end in near death of another, which is the absolute least criminal possible interpretation of the actions of this officer, that's criminal attempted murder/manslaughter1. Because (inappropriately) using a firearm is not unintentional, and officers ONLY use them to kill, this was not attempted manslaughter, which only applies when the intent is NOT to kill, it was an attempted murder.
Either way, that's a question for a jury to answer, not his superior, not the DA that he works with daily.

This is where our views part: I am not ready to ascribe malice to what can be explained by incompetence. I am not willing to do so without something more to go on. I think this sort of sensationalism can be dangerous and polarizing.

There's no doubt that these two cops could have killed the caregiver had they the intent. Even just the cop that fired, had he really wanted to, could have killed the victim, easily. The fact that they did not do so doesn't exonerate them from all wrong doing, but it does stand in the face of your charges of attempted murder.

If three shots were fired, and only one of them hit the victim, why do we assume that he was firing at the caregiver, and not the other fellow? Either way, most shots missed, and we can see the prone man was between the sitting man and the shooting man. Horrible idea to be firing, but to ascribe motive at this point is to get ahead of yourself. Negligence seems more likely.

As for the delay in medical care, there are a lot of assumptions being made it seems. Where was he shot? Was he bleeding profusely? How many of those 15 minutes passed before medics were even on the scene? The cufffing is clearly a bad idea in this case, but also sounds like protocol, which can hardly be maintained constitutes attempted murder.

That is why it is damaging to jump to conclusions early. We can say that the shooting was clearly unjust and unjustified. We can say that the officer clearly acted incompetent in his job, causing significant harm to an innocent. Beyond that you're straying into the mind reading business.

I am up in the air about his fear.
He reacts at first like he's afraid, but once the dogs are out of his range, he doesn't look for an escape route like someone in fear would do, or even look around to be sure neither dog is coming back, he continues to advance towards the back of the property, directly towards the now injured, semi cornered dog. He also certainly doesn't look at all afraid in the second view when he's leaving, I see no fear in his walk or stance, and certainly not in the lunging swipe at the barking dog.

...but, giving him every benefit of a doubt, assuming he was terrified of the dogs and just didn't show it clearly, HE'S still 100% at fault for trespassing, more so (if that's possible) in a yard with dogs (the gas company keeps a record of which houses have dogs, and the meter readers insist you put them away when they come...at least here in Cali before we got wireless meters) and therefore he's 100% at fault for his injurious reactions, even if they were in self defense, making him and the company 100% liable for any bills IMO. I hope they get excellent medical care for both dogs and get their child a good, expensive therapist, and I hope it's all at gas company expense...a high enough bill might make them change their policy. A dead tech in someone's yard would make them change, I'm pretty sure of that.

Sadly, I'm relatively certain this isn't the first time something like this has happened with that company. Any company that sends people to enter your yard once a month is going to have issues with pets now and then, but it's not like people have much choice in gas companies, so bad customer satisfaction ratings aren't a real issue for them.

I wish they posted the part where he enters, I'm curious about whether there was a closed gate that he opened, or if the yard was just open like it is when he leaves.

Poor bob, comprehension always has been a problem for you.

Feel so bad for you. Hope you can get some therapy thanks to our much improved medical care.

I'll cover IUD's first. While there is some evidence that the older style copper ParaGard might have a slightly increase in preventing a fertilized egg from implanting, the evidence for the Mirena. Here are two medical journals documenting as such:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4018277
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/13625180903519885
If those are too much reading, they are summarized in http://videosift.com/video/Myths-About-IUDs

Remember Google gives personalized search results. No two people get the same results, even when signed out of Google... More details at http://videosift.com/video/There-are-no-regular-results-on-Google-anymore

I'd also agree that there are many things America gets right. Overall it's a good country.

And I think I started out by pointing out it isn't about guns, or just about guns.

Now I'm not sure what you mean assigning attributes to the right. I was pointing out policies that are consistent with the conservative right, Republican platform positions that are not pro-life.

The Death Penalty. This is a typically Republican strong stance position. And has been at various times part of the party's official platform. The Democrat party official position supports the death penalty too, after a DNA testing and post-conviction review. The point isn't wither or not the Death Penalty is right or wrong, I'd personally argue it's wrong, it's the claim of being pro-life while supporting the death penalty. There can be no way to reconcile those two positions.

One needs only to look at how Bush and the present day regime of Republicans in Washington think of handling issues in the Middle East to see what that they support a strong military and an interventionist doctrine (http://www.ontheissues.org/Celeb/Republican_Party_War_+_Peace.htm). One of the key factors of the Bush Doctrine is preemptive strikes. While one normally wouldn't cite Wikipedia, I'll let their page on the Bush Doctrine and their references clear things up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_Doctrine. Heck Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize largely just because he wasn't Bush... sadly he did little to lower US involvement in the Middle East, a situation we should have left alone ages ago. Again the Democrats aren't as peace loving as they should be, and generally the most peace loving people in Congress tend to be Libertarians (who object more to the expense of war than war itself, and love pointing out how the war in Iraq from 2001 to 2011 cost more than NASA's entire history to that point, even after adjusting for inflation (https://www.nationalpriorities.org/cost-of/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_of_NASA)) and Libertarian leaning Republicans like Ron Paul, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus (http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/). Again, war isn't pro-life, it is perhaps one of the most anti-life things one can support short of supporting murder itself.

It's also Republicans, aka the right, that are trying to undo the Affordable Health Care Act, a program that ironically enough is modeled after the ones they tried to pass twice under Bush Sr and once under Clinton as to oppose Democrat plans to push for a Single Payer system. Prior to the passing of Obamacare, the US was spending nearly twice as much on healthcare as a percentage of it's GDP than the next nation, and getting only the 37th best results . Just listen to the crowd at the September 12 2008 Republican debate that chant over and over "let him die" as a solution to a guy who needs medical care but elected not to buy private insurance. These same people are the one's who claim to be pro-life. Affordable health care should be a right, as it is in every civilized nation but the US. Obamacare is far from ideal, but much better than the previous policy of only those with good jobs could afford health care everyone else, die or go bankrupt, driving the costs of healthcare up more. One can't say they are pro-life and oppose affordable healthcare, including for services you don't support such as IUDs (it doesn't matter that I object to our overly huge military budget that is much bigger than the next several nations combined, so it shouldn't matter if some medical services such as IUDs are supported), as quality of life matters as much as being alive.

Related to guns however is the Republican stance on stand your ground. Watch Fox News and how they defend the use of guns, or how mass shootings would be avoided if people were carrying concealed weapons and could stop the shooters... again escalating things to a death penalty. Now in the case of a mass shooter, ideally you want to take them down alive, but if death is the only option, then I personally don't object. However stand your ground typically expands to home invasion, where criminals typically aren't looking kill, just rob the place. Here they defend the homeowner's right to shoot to kill (I've been in firearm safety classes, generally the aim is to aim for the center of mass, which will likely result in death, but the odds of making a shot at the legs to impede the crooks is very low, so if you shoot you have to assume it is to kill). This position is contrary to the pro-life stance. All life is equal... which could get into a whole other argument about how they don't value immigrants, especially illegal immigrants, people who just want to improve their lives by moving to what they hope is a better country that will allow for a better opportunity for them and their families, but the Republicans are fighting hard to stop them from improving their lives here just because an accident of birth made them born in another country than the US... heck just look at the way Republicans lined the buses of refugee children fleeing war and gang torn areas of Latin America and they shouted at the children.... children... to go home that nobody wanted them. That isn't a pro-life statement, to tell a child that nobody wants them. The pro-life position would be to want to nurture and protect the children fleeing a dangerous area... We should be moving to a world without borders, as that is the pro-life position, to realize we are all humans, and that we all must share this world, and that we should do all we can to protect one another and this world and all that inhabits it (except mosquitoes, roaches, most parasites, etc... lol)

As to high poverty rates, the Republican policy of trickle down economics helps drive that. Helps spread the ever growing income and wealth gaps in the US. The Walmart heirs alone have more wealth than the bottom 40% of the US population (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2012/jul/31/bernie-s/sanders-says-walmart-heirs-own-more-wealth-bottom-/). Now true, some could argue it isn't trickle down economic that is causing the growing wealth and income gaps, but the correlation is very strong, and one is hard pressed to find any other causative points beyond the rich paying less and less to their workers while taking more and more for themselves while the government eases the tax burden on the rich more and more.

Overall I think it's clear that the people who vote Republican because they are "pro-life" are hypocrites given the party's positions in key issues that aren't pro-life. I'm sure many, especially those on the right would disagree. They'd argue the death penalty is needed to discourage others from killing and therefore protects life, and that preemptive strikes ala the Bush Doctrine keep another 9/11 from happening (although the counter to that is fairly easily that we make more extremist the more we use those strikes). So one's mileage may very. For me, I think they are hypocritical saying they are pro-life if they don't value that life as much as their own after they are born.

I'm dying to know what kind of "medical care" is given to a child who's ingested pot. Really. The hell are you going to do, other than tell them to lay down, drink something, eat something, go to sleep? What, pump them full of other drugs?!?

It depends...social security, about 1937, medicare, more like 65, public schools, that depends on what you want to call different systems, but in North America it started in 1647
https://www.raceforward.org/research/reports/historical-timeline-public-education-us
The road bit is a PERFECT example of how, even if you don't directly use a service, you benefit from others using it....just like EVERY OTHER SERVICE MENTIONED.
Because we don't deny medical services to those without money, it's a question of do you pay less beforehand or more later, because either way you pay.
Because uneducated children cost society FAR more than educating them does, standing on your myopic moral high ground demanding 'personal parental responsibility' is a self defeating stance demanding people 'give' more than some have to give with no option for the children of the poor. (That said, I can get behind the 'public schools being free only for the poor' plan I think Jefferson had, as long as those schools are on par with private one's)
I explained clearly why even those average numbers are misleading.
Again, is that purchasing power per dollar, per person, or what?
OK, 'middle class' is not the average American. How about give the average American salary instead of cherry picking a rapidly shrinking sub-group that makes your point?
We all pay through the nose...it's just about when and how. You pay for the indigent by paying higher insurance and medical bills...it would be FAR cheaper to simply pay for their medical care in the first place (as in single payer health care). That saves the 10-25% that insurance companies take as profit on day one, and saves on overall medical care cost per person by properly taking care of people instead of waiting until there's an expensive emergency to pay for. (and makes a much healthier, so happier society as a whole)
The fact is that they are happy with their system. It does not make them all 'perfectly equal', there are rich and poor in Norway...or do you not believe that? People DO get ahead in Norway, probably more so than the average person in America who has seen their financial/social status in life, purchasing power, benefits, opportunities, and security go backwards over the last 40 years, unlike Norway.
No, I think the entire 'identical to everyone else' thing is something in YOUR head, not theirs, and not reality.
Don't have disposable income?!? In Norway, not the US?!?! You've GOT to be kidding. Let's ask someone who lives there...@BicycleRepairMan , is there only one social class in Norway, all equal, all making the same amount of money, all poor and destitute with no disposable income?
Well, the American system certainly disagrees with you. Those that put the most effort into their jobs usually make FAR less than those that put little effort into taking advantage of the opportunities available to them, but not to others. Those that make more in our society almost NEVER do it with manual labor, the hardest work to do. They also rarely do 2 or 3 full time jobs, as many poor must do. It's simply not true that working harder gets you advancement in the US, opportunity and connections get you advancement.
I do agree, giving medals for average/expected performance is ridiculous, but that rarely happens in business.

I don't owe $200k either, because I chose to buy insurance. You seem to believe that you have a right to breath and a heart beat, and you would be correct. However, you are incorrect in believing that you have the right to force someone to take care of you, to enslave them to provide you with medical care. If you are such a nice person, why don't you appeal to someone's sympathy to take care of you?

Have you even considered why medical care is expensive? Why are there so many barriers to competition that keep prices high?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHXzAU8_0fg

The problem I've had is that both in Ferguson and the New York case, the Grand Jury both seemed to vote on guilt/innocence, not if there is merit for a trail. Ferguson could have ended up with an innocent verdict had it actually gone to trial, if only because of massive conflicting testimony (people would still be upset, but at least if there was a trial it'd probably have been minimized). The New York choke hold is a bit harder to see how it didn't go to trial, there's a flipping camera recording it.

The Cleveland one that seems to be blowing up is a bit different, though the family wasn't treated with proper respect, I'm a bit more on the cop side there since the orange cap was off (and who can fully trust that if all you have to do is paint the tip of a real gun orange) and it looked real in the time they had. One could argue they shot too soon, but hard to tell how long to give. The problem in that case is they didn't call for medical care quick enough (not that it probably would have helped) and they blocked and arrested the family, treating them without any respect to a dead/dying child that by that point they knew had a toy gun. Let the mother get to her kid, let the sister go and don't make the mother choose to stay with her daughter or ride with her son... That's where the Cleveland one went south.

Numbers don't tell the whole story, do they? Were all of those deaths ruled as unjustified?

According to an article at propublica, as many as 440,000 deaths per year are attributed to poor medical care in hospitals. So what are you doing to do, take all the doctor's scalpels away?

This video shows a cop trying to find marijuana, which is still illegal in most states. What this video doesn't show is the amount of stolen property that is recovered by the same technique, which is bluffing. But of course, people who commit burglaries and thefts don't videotape the encounters they have with police officers.

Today, more and more people are learning their rights and exercising them, and fewer busts are made through bluffing. But the police will adjust to it.

When I worked the road, I didn't give a crap about speeders, so didn't run radar or laser, and I didn't really care about marijuana because alcohol is far more dangerous to people, but I did bust a couple of bikers from a biker gang trying to sell a grocery bag full of marijuana. They also had a 9mm, which would have been used to a criminal manner, I'm sure. By the way, they got off of the marijuana charge because the judge said I didn't have enough probably cause to make the stop, even though I knew through observation that they were up to something highly suspicious.
how'd you like to buy your grass from a biker with a semi-auto on him?

I know, when I was buying grass in my college days, I didn't buy it from bikers, but a lot of people do.

Yeah, that's true, I'm sure the burden of glutenophobics on our medical system and taxpayer dollars is right up there with hangnails and "it hurts when I do this". Tempest in a teacup. If I'm going to get pissed about something chewing up taxpayer dollars that's related to healthcare for stupid people doing stupid things, it sure isn't going to be gluten. How about, oh, I don't know, smoking. For the years 2009–2012, economic cost due to smoking is estimated to be more than $289 billion a year. This cost includes at least $133 billion in direct medical care for adults and more than $156 billion for lost productivity from premature death estimated from 2005 through 2009**.

Any stats out on the gluten hysteria and burden on health care? I think that cumulative is going to take a long time to show up on the graph, and the fad will likely have died before the next leap year.

(**US Department of Health and Human Services. The Health Consequences of Smoking—50 Years of Progress: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Dept. of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2014)

If there's irrefutable evidence that a suspect is guilty, a trial is an utter waste of time and taxpayer money. Executions themselves don't have to be expensive either. Get rid of death row, get rid of fancy lethal injections. Just break the criminal's neck and dump him in a hole or incinerate him. That would be far, far cheaper than providing him with food, shelter, medical care, etc, for the duration of his sentence.

The reliability of our judiciary system is another matter entirely and separate from the matter of punishment. It's definitely flawed and would need to be reworked before enacting any of the changes I've proposed.

Worth keeping in mind that the reason the US has such short lines for medical services, is because so few people can afford to get in line.

Canada has the opposite issue. Anyone can get medical care, so there are a lot of people waiting for their turn.
(Note that non-elective procedures skip to the head of the line, so you're not waiting around to fix something immediately life threatening.)

Seems like a combo approach would be ideal.
Have both public and private medicine.
- People that can't spare the time, that want elective procedures, can go private.
- People that can wait go public.
- People that need non-elective procedures can go either private or public and get their work done right away regardless.

-scheherazade

Nothing wrong here, the girl is just shouting all the time. She even had her cuffs put on front after all that crying and what does she do? Tries to twist them off (FYI, it doesn't work..) while shouting "i'm hurting" when clearly no ones is hurting her. The bad thing about this kind of attitude is that if you're actually hurt, no one believes you and you get those unfortunate cases where someone is denied of medical care. There are tons of vids on police brutality, this is not one of them.