Just a anecdotal based response: Left my 3 year old, who was asleep buckled in his seat (which he cannot undo), in the car on an overcast day, 68 degrees out, doors locked. I left a second cell phone on monitor, so I could hear him if he woke up. Went in to a strip mall store 50 yards away from the car.
I hear him wake up, so I come out to check on him, and there's some man, apparently having banged on the window to wake him up, looking at me like I was trying to kill him. Apparently took my license plat and called child services, who eventually called me, my wife, my parents, and did a full investigation. I had almost the same experience, but I'm white and privileged so did not get arrested or have my children removed. I'm confident it could have been a lot worse if I was near the poverty line. I also received a similar lecture:
"We recognize that temperature and weather were ok, but do you recognize how unsafe it was to leave him unsupervised?"
"No, I don't. What could have happened? He was secure and unable to come out of the chair, the doors were locked, and he was monitored"
"Well some one could have smashed the window and taken him"
"Really? A stranger abduction, from a locked car, in broad daylight?"
"Well, what about if the police were called, and you were arrested in front of him. Wouldn't that be traumatic?"

And there they are right. And there you have it - the real danger is not any ACTUAL danger, it's our own fear. FDR had it right.

Have I said any such things? I certainly don't recall saying any of that.
You must note, however, that the overreaction you get from some people likely stems from attempts to shame them using exaggeration, hyperbole, and even outright lies, which tend to make enemies to your cause rather than converts. I've never met a vegan that didn't operate that way to some degree. Perhaps those people are just giving back the same level of honest discussion and discourse they received. There's apparently something about veganism that makes it's practitioners think their movement is more important that fact and truth, like the "Dr." (and his followers) who claimed eating any amount of any red meat is just as carcinogenic as smoking a pack a day of cigarettes, citing WHO studies that said nothing of the sort. Many have said "If you agree with my goal, stopping animal suffering, why would you contradict my claims, even though I privately agree they're exaggeration and fantasy?". Ends don't justify means imo, and nothing justifies lying.

I don't need a degree in nutrition or to be a dietitian to understand the basics covered in multiple health classes I've passed and multiple scientific studies I've read. Is meat healthy? Yes....if it's raised and prepared properly and eaten in moderation. Is meat unhealthy? Yes...when eaten excessively or prepared unsafely.
Is veganism healthy? Yes....when practiced properly with a balanced diet that has all the nutrients humans need. Is veganism unhealthy? Yes...it is the way it's practiced by most vegans who don't have a grasp on what proper nutrition is. It's definitely harder to have a balanced healthy diet without any animal products, but isn't impossible.

Once again, I feel you are being fast and loose with fact by implying any of those statements have come from me. The only people I expect to die 6 times in a row are the ones in my dungeon that I'm keeping alive to prolong their torture....and they know what they did to deserve it. ;-)

tbh, I think he has a point. Thing is, as far as I think, risk was very low in this incident. Firefighters are professionals, they work with risk. they made a decision and worked with that.

same thing probably applies to humans, if they consider it unsafe to save a life they will most likely not risk a life.

The alleged victim's testimony was the extent of the prosecution's case against Perry and Counts. There was no physical evidence linking them to the crime.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2018/05/07/convictions-vacated-26-year-old-rape/588406002/

It was Banks’ word against hers and she was not likely to change her story. After all, Gibson sued the Long Beach Unified School District claiming the school’s lax security provided an unsafe environment that led to the fraudulent rape. She would eventually receive a settlement of 1.5 million dollars.

Brian Banks was faced with an impossible decision at the time – either fight the charges and risk spending 41 years-to-life in prison, or take a plea deal and spend a little over 5 years of actual prison confinement. Although it would mean destroying his chance to go to college and play football, a lengthy probationary period, and a lifetime of registration as a sex offender, Banks chose the lesser of two evils when he pleaded no contest to the charges.

https://californiainnocenceproject.org/read-their-stories/brian-banks/


I'd look up more, but I have to go pick up my wife from work.

Distracted driving, a misdemeanor, often becomes a felony when it causes serious injury or damage....it seems that's the case in Maryland.....

Jake's Law was passed in response. Texting while driving or using a hand-held cellphone while driving was already illegal in Maryland. ... Now, distracted drivers who cause serious injury or death can receive up to three years in jail and up to a $5,000 fine.

They damn well better prosecute him for that, and unsafe driving, illegal left turn, driving into oncoming traffic causing an accident, etc. Police are not above the law, they serve it. No excuses here.

Easy to say when you're white, adult, and you weren't just shot at by strangers. Keep in mind this was a kid who had just been shot at, so probably not the world's best decision maker at that moment.....
Choice 1) Submit yourself to the whims of what you believe are racist cops more interested in convicting black kids than the truth that already sound convinced you're a murderer they want to kill, knowing just the accusation will ruin if not end your life or 2) attempt to escape with your hands visible so they know you aren't threatening.

That cop's boss disagrees with you and said he was reckless and unsafe to a criminal extent and didn't follow procedure, as did the DA. You'll excuse me if I put more stock in their professional opinions than yours.
That said, white cop/black kid, so he probably won't be convicted, but be clear that's not the same as being cleared of wrongdoing. There's zero question he did wrong, he shot the wrong unarmed kid in the back 3 times. If it were your kid I doubt you would make excuses for the ex-officer or be so quick to pay him on the back for executing them.

When I used to ride 30+ miles a day, I came damn close to being ended in the same type of accidents repeatedly. I learned quickly that trucks won't see bicyclists, even when they can see them, and so they demand your close attention. In this case, the truck had it's blinker on well before she passed it. She should have paid closer attention to traffic around her for her own safety.
That's not to say it's her fault, just that, as the one who will be injured or killed in an accident, it's prudent to be vigilant looking out for others driving unsafely.

All that said, since the driver knew he hit someone and drove away, only calling for police/ambulance later from another town, it should be manslaughter at a minimum, I can't fathom no charges being brought. WTF?!

He opened his door prepared to show ID. The door closed on him. He never "pointed" his wallet (as if that's even possible) at all, he caught it when the door made him almost drop it, then immediately put both hands in the air, showing them both clearly and got shot for it....shot in a way that was totally unsafe for the other citizen approaching from the truck who was almost shot too.

Your take seems to be excusing this shooting, which is inexcusable.

Yeah, in Japan both people would have been at fault. They're really strict about that stuff. Even if you have the right of way, if an accident could have been avoided just by you being a more cautious driver, you'll wind up getting ticketed too.

Happened to my boss a month ago--he got hit at a light while making a turn during a green turn arrow (driver coming from opposite direction gunned it on the yellow but didn't beat the red). The police ruled that even though my boss had the right of way, a cautious driver should anticipate people trying to beat the light and check to make sure traffic coming from the opposite direction is fully stopped before initiating a turn, so both parties were at fault (though not equally of course).

Basically as a driver in Japan you are supposed to assume that everyone around you is an unsafe driver and take any necessary precautions to avoid accidents. The only time you'll 100% not be at fault for an accident is if you're rear-ended while fully stopped or if the car experiences a catastrophic mechanical failure (i.e. blowing a tire on the freeway causing you to temporarily lose control of the vehicle).

The driver has no idea what he's getting into when the cop is starting by violating procedure and using his weapon to pull over a car. The driver wants to go home after driving, see his family, make it to another day of life. If he feels he needs to shoot that cop drawing down on him over nothing to make sure he's safe...do it.
And I and others will stand here and support him for self defense while you have a conniption fit.

The only one making things unsafe here is the cop, who has made at least one if not more people unsupportive of other cops who may be doing their job properly and not with irrational or controlling fear causing them to put others lives in danger. If fear is the controlling factor in his actions, he absolutely should not be a law officer.

He will stand there while he receives dozens of complaints on his permanent record stopping him from ever being promoted, and while his trial for shooting an innocent person moves forward, and while his family leaves him due to the numerous death threats they receive, while he goes into hiding, and while normal citizens ridicule him daily for being exposed as a violent snowflake, etc.......I'm not sure what you're point was with that statement.

The moment the yellow can is half clear of the intersection the vehicle that cuts left when unsafe is already visible, aka clear line of sight. Predicting that another driver is likely to veer in for a head on collision is impossible. I've watched a couple times and can't see any turn signals either. What's with everyone getting on the biker here?

Saw this elsewhere quite a while back, but still very interesting to watch. Takeaway: old cars are both ugly AND unsafe.

Read this rebuttle on a public forum on an ad from Purple when someone brought this up:

Purple:
Hi Caitlin, we didn't sue because we has questions, as he asserted. We filed action against Honest Mattress Reviews (HMR), Ryan Monahan & GhostBed for violating the law by spreading false and misleading statements online, including specific statements that GhostBed — a primary competitor of Purple — had previously agreed to remove from its website and various social media platforms. Now, however, those and other false and misleading statements are being made on HMR and Momahan's newly-created mattress-industry-related blog. We have reason to believe Monahan & GhostBed are "in bed together" — some of the connections we've found are here: https://onpurple.com/blog/connections-ryan-monahan-ghostbed.

HMR’s, Monahan’s and GhostBed’s campaign against Purple includes numerous false and misleading statements about Purple and its products and services, including false claims about the safety of Purple’s mattresses, the assumed lack of adequate safety testing for Purple’s products, and Purple’s alleged deception of its customers regarding safety. In fact, many of the statements go so far as to imply that Purple’s mattresses are dangerous and can lead to serious diseases. These statements have been proven to be false and unfounded, and yet, they continue to dishonestly proclaim that Purple's products are unsafe.

The suit is public record and why we sued is clearly spelled out in it, but to clear up what seems to be insinuated — we didn’t sue because he gave us a bad review or because of his 4 safety questions (as he’s asserted). On the contrary, we encourage third-party reviews as an important part of the consumer research process. We are merely protecting our company and intellectual property against a dishonest ”reviewer” with connections to a competitor.

Since every time we discuss the lawsuit publicly evidence of the connection seems to disappear, this is all we can say at this time. Again, the suit is public record and you're welcome to review it yourself.

Skimming through things there, things start becoming fishy. He's a social media specialist, and certainly mis-represents the lawsuit in his videos, and given he had a ghostbed email address at one point, seems to indicate a rather comfortable relationship with GB (who carefully worded the point on the email issue, leaving it open to admit that the guy did have an email with them, just doesn't presently).

At the same time, I think there is some valid concern over the powder, which I'd guess is to help release it from the mold and aid in keeping it from sticking while rolled. It'll be interesting to see some more independent lab reports than the ones we've seen so far. Also, how much of said powder actually gets out if you, like most people, don't rip off the sock and cover (aside to occasionally wash the cover)? I understand micro-beads can be unsafe to inhale, but in typical use, how much gets from the bed into the air compared to other items used on a daily basis gets in the air?

Also, not sure the Streisand Effect is going on, as Purple was really well known before. Almost every mattress commercial I've seen on the Internet has been for Purple. So I don't think this is spreading their brand... unless this about spreading his brand, in which case it could be.

Okay, so I started going on about the Streisand Effect and jumped subjects to some comments in the Reddit thread about people who've never heard of Purple, then back to the effect. I'll blame that on the fact I was running late for work.

Anyhow, as to said effect, given that Purple isn't suing because he asked about the safety issues, but is instead being sued for not disclosing his relationship with a competitor, I don't know if it applies. Now it probably is bringing far more attention to the plastic beads than otherwise would be there. Now he however is being exposed for his relationships with GhostBed, and lots of questions are being raised about him, which is why I said it might apply to him.

Meanwhile, as I noted in the original paragraph, some people are saying they never heard of Purple, so I was doubting this spreads the brand, nor improves GhostBed's standing.

I had more, but I can't recall all I was going to say as the comment system crashed beyond the point I could come back and edit.

No, you call the cops, you don't destroy other peoples property and operate machinery in a haphazard and unsafe way. Show me ONE foreman who would want this guy on his shift. Someone who flies off the handle and commandeers company property to break the law. Imagine of someone else was in the car still.