I talk to people all the time... "I'm an atheist" ... I just walk away

So... in addition to:
- sleeping in on sunday
- eating whatever the fuck you want
- not worrying about going to hell
- have the best comedians

we now have yet another benefit to being an atheist! Thanks, moron!

Sweet monkey jesus, it just gets worse.

The "restraining order" bit? Hah! Stalking women is fucking hilarious!
The "men and women can't be friends"? WHAT THE FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU? and he accuses atheists of lacking a moral compass?

Im moving to Connecticut at the end of this year. I am looking forward to joining (one of) the local groups there, now that I know of the sport. Fencing and Kendo have always been too 'restrained' for me. This is most likely due to not understanding certain, set customs on my part, but from my perspective if my nature, and what I perceive as natural, oversteps some organizations predefine ruleset, I can't see it as a test of actual ability. You can most certainly find examples for and against that, but that's how I look at a particular structure prior to empirical evidence.
If I were to translate that to human understanding it would probably be: In the majority of competitive events throughout my life, when questioned on the 'why' of rules, 'just because' has been the overwhelming answer, rather than a rational understanding/explanation of the sport.
Anyway, I'm going to longsword some mother-fuckers in a few months, and I can't wait for that final joust and the claiming of the princess, silhouetted against that raging castle fireplace (Defender of the Crown reference, FYI).

I have two girls and I have taught them that they deserve equality with men in all things. I have told them that, short of self defence, they should never take advantage of their femininity by resorting to violence against anyone because the "victim" of their violence would be justified in retaliating. Going by what this vid shows it appears the woman, not once, but twice, assaulted the man. Maybe he could have restrained her, but it appears he just lashed out in self-defence. Your comment implies woman have the right to do this with impunity and without consequence. You are wrong. Equality means just that, it does NOT mean that in selected circumstances some are more equal than others. All violence is, when perpetrated without just cause, wrong. But your comment that; "It doesn't matter if she's slapping you, punching you, charging you, strangling you, stabbing you or shooting at you," is ridiculous. If a woman - or anybody for that matter - attempts any of the above, then self defence is totally justified. To deny this is to give woman the right to resort to violence in the belief that misguided opinion, such as yours, will be on their side.

I think if I could just smash voodoo in the face one time that he would learn some manners because he does wallow in glee whenever he is able to troll someone, push all their buttons, and get away with it. Voodoo is not civil and needs to know that there are limits. Voodoo is the 'internet tough guy'. He knows that I cannot reach through the cloud and bust his nose.

Having said that, I have never struck anyone in 30 yrs of law enforcement experience. I have wrestled a few women, restrained a few men, tased one guy who was resisting arrest, never shot at anyone or used an asp on anyone.

I get along with everyone except for people who are temporarily full of themselves with attitude, but it's remarkable how docile people get after a few days in jail (I don't put them there, the court does). People with the biggest attitudes really go through a change of heart. I treat them kindly and considerately and get great results. I feel that if I treat them kindly that the next time they are less likely to assault another police officer.

Zimmerman was doing a service to his community by keeping a watch on it, due to all the burglaries that had been committed in that area. Martin assaulted Zimmerman and had to be shot to keep from at least, a felonious assault on GZ. In your world, only GZ has to restrain himself, not TM.

You make an assumption based on your bias against cops. I made my speculation based on what I've heard of the case and 30 yrs on the job. That is why you are wrong.

@ChaosEngine wins the internet. He's exactly right, it's not about the orientation, it's about the overt, explicit nature. No one wants to hear about someone's sexual adventures in mixed company, straight or gay.

Hollywood, loves to fall back to a definite gay stereotype though.

Glee was actually guilty of this in the the first few seasons. Kurt, the gay character had a crush on Finn, the straight character, and not only that, they were step brothers. Kurt practically stalked Finn and was downright harassing at times. Yet Finn was portrayed as the jerk for not being "more accepting"

It's ironic, TV and movies had a large role in making America more accepting of homosexuality, but they also perpetuate some shitty stereotypes too. News flash, not all homosexuals are flaming interior decorators.

Oh and ACTUAL homophobes? You're not that good looking. Gays are actually able to restrain themselves from raping you in broad daylight. Shocking, I know.

Whenever I go to Benihana's I end up with rice in my hair. I approve of this ladies tastefully restrained food preparation showmanship.

Another reason is because women are victimized by ex boyfriends and husbands and murdered at an alarmingly high rate. I read elsewhere this commercial is being aired right now because there is some voting going on with something to do about people that have restraining orders can't obtain guns. Seems fair to me.

Anyone scoffing at this commercial isn't getting the point that this is happening all the time in the U.S. We are the 14th most in gun deaths per capita in the company of mostly 2nd / 3rd world nations. That sure is something to be proud of.

I disagree. There is a huge moral gulf between deliberately setting out to kill someone and having someone die while they are resisting your attempt to restrain them.

And "an overwhelming forceful attack" is the whole point of an arrest. It's not supposed to be a fair fight, the suspect is supposed to give up peacefully when he sees the odds stacked against him. That it ended in his death is because he resisted arrest.

Here's the thing. You know all those movies and TV shows where an innocent man resists arrest, solves the crime he's accused of and is eventually proven right? Guess what happens in real life... he still gets convicted of resisting arrest. The law is like that for a reason. It's not up to you to decide your guilt or innocence.

I'm not saying the cops were right (as @Jerykk pointed out, there's no context to decide if they should have been arresting him), but calling it murder is unreasonable.

I think it's noble to do whatever little you can to oppose the brutal half-century long occupation, humiliation, starvation and assassination of your people, yes.

Israel is an illegal occupying power in international law, that's a fact. It constantly violates practically every obligation that occupation incurs in international law; it engages in collective punishment, it regularly seizes and destroys private property, it laughingly fails to provide for the safety and welfare of the population under its control, it settles occupied territory with its civilians, it forcibly relocates Palestinian civilians, it routinely ignores the UN's attempts to restrain these and other illegal behaviours, these are facts.

Israel is engaged in terrorism in Gaza and elsewhere, and has been for decades - fact.

When I get into that situation, there's screaming, and scratching, and crying, and then charges and restraining orders...


...sometimes the girl gets upset too.

According to the description it was destined for installation in a hotel in Ciudad de Mexico.

You can see that there was supposed to be a gate at the front as well as the back, but it was blocked by the boards under the car... and they didn't think to secure it any other way.

The end of the video is the guys all asking each other who was supposed to have restrained the car...

I'll try, @chingalera!
Aand @oritteropo - I'll try to restrain myself. I usually don't have that many power points at once, though.

Here's one for the sift: Because I sent an email from an address I had used as an alias on this site to my ex-wife's mother trying to track down my ex and children who, in violation of divorce decree, left the state without notifying me....
My ex-mother-in-law (crazy, paranoid academic) lied and said she felt threatened by my inquiry, made some shit up in a police report in King County, Washington and slapped me with a restraining order. For a fucking email, in which I neither threatened them or anyone they knew.

I am arrested for something completely unrelated 5 years later, charged with threatening the lives of policemen (fucking rant about how small their dicks were and their mommy-issues form the back of the cop car) the State of Texas is charging me with felony obstruction, and some intern in the DA's office preparing for the state's case, goes online, finds my alias and LOW AND BEHOLD-The state has in their hands my dossier from Videosift from every time the user had typed ANYTHING derogatory concerning police in general.

Big brother is up your ass and you people without balls and more common sense than myself....ain't got a fucking clue.

Thanks again Lucky, for eliminating those comments on said behalf, even though they have the hard-copy, which, I am told by my atty., would be of no effect either way to peruse
.-Freedom of speech is utter fucking bullshit in the United States of Now-Thanks to all the ineffectual pseudo-intellectual ass-sniffers who thinks republicans or democrats are any sort of concern or problem OR that your participation in their government machine can do anything but enslave you further. Play a losing game and you wake up in chains.

I'm kinna with the Dark Knight Joker at this juncture...Surprise me again with some motherfucking "change", eh??
*Freedom in the form of boots stamping on a human face forever, America.

There will never be an easy solution, but in discussing drones there are points that deserve deliberation;
The Pakistani government cannot be seen, publicly, to condone drone strikes. However, given the carnage being done by the taliban, which they are finding difficult to contain, behind the scenes they actually do.
Terrorists existed long before drones and to believe that ceasing their use would reduce terrorism is naive and dangerous.
Manned or unmanned - and no matter what care is taken - weapons cause collateral damage. But these weapons can be highly effective, as was demonstrated in the "taking out" of the pakistani taliban leader last week.
If the terrorists had the same technology they would, certainly, use it. At the moment they are restricted to suicide bombers and maniacs with AK's who massacre innocents in schools or shopping malls etc. If/when they acquire chemical, biological, or atomic weapons you will see just how "restrained" in there use they truly are.
All weapons can be used for evil. The difference is, who controls them and how they are used. You just have to ask yourself, who would you prefer to hold the military advantage?