There are many reasons it might not even be possible to vote in representatives for these people. Gerrymandering, fixed elections, etc. Negligence and apathy are valid, but I doubt they're the primary reasons. And all people are equal, just as all people are fallible.

Cops are just like anyone else, with the exception that they have an institution that will protect them from their personal decisions, such as shooting unarmed, or racially segregated people out of spite. I have more personal experience than I like with white police officers openly practicing racism and physical abuse, when the only minority around is their victim.

You cite how Brown allegedly tried to take the mans gun. He also allegedly did not. Unfortunately it comes down to the eye-witness account versus the officers. In cases like this, I can find 999 instances out of a thousand that reflect police organizations that promote racism and abuse, in a scenario where the minority suspect did everything expected of them in a confrontation, and was still victimized. Having the gall to support the officers in this case, a case where we as the observers have nothing to go on other than heresay, is ignoring decades of historical experience with exactly these scenarios.

Lastly, you're not a boyscout. I'm not a boyscout. Fuck boyscouts; they don't even exist in realistic contexts. I don't give a good god damn fucking shit what he did prior to being murdered. It is so irrelevant it's laughable. In this particular instance where we're judging a man for deserving life or death, it doesn't matter if he skullfucked a litter of puppies and raped the kindly mother of everyone on earth collectively. If the man who shot him had no idea of the crime, as has already been shown he did not, he had absolutely no right to fire on an unarmed man. Even if he *did* know of these crimes: he still has no right to take the mans life.

If Brown tried to grab the mans gun, he failed, and therefore he was still unarmed. We have multiple witness accounts that he was shot while surrendering. At that point, crimes, robberies, past events, whatever: none of that matters, because one man killed another while the latter was no threat. No other argument you can make has any validity.

I'm not really concerned if someone is an addict or a criminal. I'm simply concerned with the repercussions of hard drugs being made readily available for anyone to use. The prohibition did increase crime, sure, but the availability of liquor since then has caused far more deaths and ruined many more lives. Hell, in 2010, alcohol killed almost as many people in the U.S. as guns did. Tobacco causes more than 5 million deaths worldwide each year. Just because something is legal doesn't mean it isn't harmful. The widespread availability of liquor and tobacco has caused more damage than the entire war on drugs.

As for education, I don't think that's the root of the problem. Everyone knows that smoking is unhealthy and that alcohol is addictive and that driving while drunk is incredibly dangerous. The problem isn't lack of awareness. The problem is apathy. People know these things yet do them anyway because they just don't care. The momentary relief/pleasure derived from liquor and cigarettes is more important to them. If all drugs were legalized, I have no doubt that more people would use them because they'd be easier to get and people don't really care about the downsides.

@artician In my view and this maybe too simple, but I think that Israel and the United States should not just obey international law, but obey their own populations who want a 2 state solution. There is no reason for this to be continuing on except that Israel wants the better land and the US wants a good middle east ally and base of operations.

Go back to the 1973 borders, accept the 2 state solution and we'll be done with it. Israel doesn't accept that because they say Jordan is the only palestinian state they'll allow to exist. The world has voted several times, their own populations have expressed their wishes. The only way they can continue is with apathy and a giant propaganda campaign.

How do you define "small" when it comes to narcotics? If I have a pound of cocaine, is that small? What about meth? PCP? LSD? Heroin? Narcotics are banned because they are harmful. Not just to yourself but to others. They are also addictive. Do you really think a junkie will be satiated by the small portions allowed by your proposed law? Nope. They'll always be looking for more and will do anything to get it. That's why drug-dealing is such a profitable business. A better solution is execution. If you're convicted of possession or abuse (no trial necessary if there's irrefutable evidence), you're dead. No further expenses beyond the execution (via cow puncher or some other cost-effective means) and body disposal (incineration seems most efficient). Zero chance of relapse.

As for money, sure, we could cut military funding. That would give us some money, though most of it would go towards rehabilitating criminals and paying off our numerous debts. We could increase taxes on the rich, even though they already pay the majority of taxes in the country. We could increase taxes for everyone, which we would inevitably need to do if we want top-quality education and healthcare for everyone.

As to your other points, we already have free healthcare. Well, relatively free in the form of Obamacare. We already have free education too. Public schools are free and available in almost every city. Said schools already offer sex education as well. The issue isn't really about education. Any dunce knows that having unprotected sex will result in babies. The problem is apathy. Some people just don't care. They don't think in the long-term. They don't plan ahead. They don't consider the long-term repercussions of their actions. All they care about is the here and now. It's not hard to find a condom. It's much harder to convince an apathetic and irresponsible person to actually wear it. You can tell them about the risks but if they don't think the condom is comfortable or convenient, they won't wear it. On the other hand, put a gun to their head and they'll definitely wear it.

I don't geddit. Labour voters can't petition Conservatives because they didn't vote for them?

So yah. Initially he's accused of political apathy masquerading as revolutionary, then when he gets stuck in suddenly he's a hypocrite because he's not the apathetic they painted him as.

Actually, the proof that something did not end up in the hands of the Chinese, the Russians, or myself for that matter, is quite difficult, given that evidence of absence is impossible to obtain. However, the absence of evidence to the claim that they have gained access to information through Snowden himself is reason enough for me.

You want proof that nothing was transfered to them? Might as well try to prove the non-existance of the famous tea pot in orbit.

So the basic argument boils down to motivation as well as credibility of claims.

His motivation to keep access to his material restricted to the selected group of journalists is apparent from his own interviews. They are supposed to be the check on the government, they lack the information to fullfil the role, they need access to correct (what he perceived to be) a wrong, namely a grave breach of your consitution on a previously unheard of scale.
Providing access to Russia or China would instantly negate all hope of ever not drawing the short straw in this mess, as the US is the only country on the planet who can provide him with amnesty and therefore safety.

So why would he do it? For a shot at asylum? You know as well as I do that (permanent) asylum in China/Russia is worthless if the US is after you. Europe could guarantee one's safety, but given the lack of sovereignty vis-a-vis the US, it would not be an option.

That leaves credibility of claims. And that's where my first reason comes into play, the one you put down as "naive". His opponents, those in positions of power, be it inside government or the press, have a track record of being... let's not mince words here, lying sacks of shit. James Clapper's act of perjury on front of Congress is just the most prominent manifestation of it. The entire bunch lied their asses off during the preparation of the invasion of Iraq, they lied their asses off during the revelations triggered by Chelsea Manning and they lied their asses off about the total und unrelenting surveillance of American citizens in violation of their constitutional rights.

If you think supervision of the NSA by the Select Committee on Intelligence is actually working, I suggest you take a look at statements by Senator Wyden. The NSA even plays them for fools. Hell, Bruce Schneier was recently approached by members of Congress to explain to them what the NSA was doing, because the NSA refused to. Great oversight, works like a charm. By the way, it's the same fucking deal with GCHQ and the BND.

So yes, the fella who "stole" data is actually a trustworthy figure, because a) his claims were true and b) his actions pulled off the veil that covered the fact that 320 million Americans had their private data stolen and were sold out by agencies of their own government in conjunction with private intelligence contractors.

What else...

Ah, yeah. "Sloppy" and "stupid". Again, if he was sloppy and stupid, what does that say about the internal control structure of the intelligence industry? They didn't notice shit, they still claim to be unaware of what precisely he took with him. Great security, fellas.

"He could have allowed the press to do it's job without disclosing a much of what has been released."

He disclosed nothing. He is not an experienced journalist and therefore, by his own admission, not qualified to make the call what to publish and how. That's why he handed it over to Barton Gellman at the WaPo, Glenn Greenwald at the Guardian and Laura Poitras, who worked closely with Der Spiegel.

If Spiegel, WaPo and Guardian are not reputable institutions of journalism, none are. So he did precisely what you claim he should have done: he allowed the press to do its bloody job and released fuck all himself.

As for the cheap shot at not being an American: seventy years ago, your folks liberated us from the plague of fascism, brought us freedom. Am I supposed to just sit here and watch my brothers and sisters in the US become the subjects of total surveillance, the kind my country suffered from during two dictatorships in the last century?

Ironically, that would be un-American, at least the way I understand it.

And there's nothing gleeful about my concerns. I am deeply furious about this shit and even more so about the apathy of people all around the world. You think I want Americans to suffer from the same shit we went through as a petty form of payback?

Fuck that. It's the intelligence industry that I'm gunning for. Your nationality doesn't mean squat, some intelligence agency has its crosshairs on you wherever you live. It just happens to be an American citizen who had the balls to provide us with the info to finally try and protect citizens in all countries from the overreaching abuse by the intelligence industry.

In fact, I'd rather worry about our own massive problems within Europe (rise of fascism in Greece, 60% youth unemployment, unelected governments, etc). So can we please just dismantle all these spy agencies and get on with our lives?

Sorry if this is incoherent, but it's late and I'm even more pissed off than usual.

I hate to get on Bill Nye, and I agree with the need for more foreign aid even. I must protest non the less about war being a minor factor in poverty and related deaths. Blaming the millions that die of starvation and malnutrition in Africa on that alone is little different than saying that the millions who starved under Stalin and Mao could have been saved by foreign aid.

Even when there isn't active warfare in the most poverty ridden places of the world, there are warlords and criminals ruling the region through starvation and actively redirecting what little foreign aid there is to themselves and away from those that do not support them. Simply sending more food and money to places like Somalia or North Korea does nothing to help the people there, and if the aid is naively sent blind to whomever holds power it actually makes things WORSE by strengthening the very monsters responsible for the suffering. I'd like to believe our apathy here is the biggest problem as much as the next guy, but the reality is that there are also people local to the problem involved first hand in perpetuating and profiting from human suffering. If we refuse to admit that there are instances were 'aid' necessarily takes the form of shooting the bad guys then we are doomed to watching as the next genocide plays out, as we did for the Rwandan Tutsis, Iraqi Kurds and Shias and countless others.

You're ignoring the entire record of human history... No gov. means a void that people will try to fill. How many warlords are there in Somalia?

From chaos and disorder, the wielder of the biggest club will eventually float to the top. Whether that club is literal (feudal/tribal) or a democratic faction, or a totalitarian regime/police state is immaterial.

But hey, the internet is the panacea for the furious crowd. Now people can soapbox day and night as they order in pizza and consume litres of sugar filled beverages before ordering something else pointless on the internet. Slacktivism at it's finest.

Apathy is the new outrage and it's all the rage.

@artician- the really hard part while trying not to burn-out on humanity is suffering apathy and mindless subservience in a time when knowledge and information is on-tap and available to non-members of the "club." -Clear light IS a motherfucker and most people are too weak to process information and respond accordingly.

Same old, same old. The few will always control the many and destroy the weak.

The emperor wears no clothes not only that, he sucks cock by choice and is still breathing the same air as us.

Unless you eradicate the queen the ants leave a clean slate for the next infestation.

No more metaphor, anyone with an opinion on geopolitics, or religion seeking to argue premise within the confines of these faulty estates are masturbating in public at this chapter in earth history as the cunts will succeed. Best to get as far from the blast zone as possible screams the expat inside my head.

Sorry for the lack of clarity, but it isn't that unclear unless you would be stunned with disbelief by the answer. We, America--as I said--we understand how fucked up the system is. Through apathy or fear or some other reason, we, America, don't care.

Not being sarcastic, just pointing out that America is different from other Western nations, and not in a good way. When I say "we" I don't mean all Americans. Just enough to keep universal healthcare out of our laws.

It's this kind of apathy, and lack of understanding that allows for such horrific injustices to exist in the first place.

But you don't care.

Ahh thanks angel, you can always be relied on to come up with the good shit. I've been avoiding his rants for a while, because I'm barraged every day with what is going so badly wrong in this country. But he reminds me to stay fucking angry and not cave into apathy. Thank you

I am so badly jaded by this point that i consider almost everything with power in the western world to be corrupt.

I used to say that those who were intelligent and caring enough to lead and forge a better world for all of us are least suited to get there, but i have since changed my opinion to a worse one; those who are most suited to getting into a position of power are those without empathy for others, who can and will abuse anyone and anything to further themselves - they are known as professional psychopaths, and i think we are led by them.

In our country right now, on average, the richest pay less tax than the poor, and the extremely rich can afford to pay no tax. Our MP's cheat expenses (which are already outrageous) and have second houses paid for them, they set up laws to help them dodge tax and make changes to our social systems so that they can sell them off to their friends. They recently even wanted a further pay hike because apparently all of those things followed by a guaranteed golden handshake/pension is not enough. Meanwhile, and this is not hyperbole, there are elderly people dying because they can't afford to heat their homes during the winter, and food banks have risen meteorically because others can't afford to feed their families.

This feels like some sort of medieval nightmare, where the kings and lords are living a life of plenty, stuffing their faces with roast pigs whilst the commoners starve and eat grass outside the castle walls.

I am genuinely concerned for the world, and i am bewildered by the fact that none of my friends seem to care as much as i do. All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing - apathy is how this world will burn.

The real BS is that the original video is from 1997 and the world still faces the same apathy to the energy, pollution and climate crises, corporate stonewalling of energy innovation and efforts at every level of government and industry to maintain the status quo at out own peril.

Wow I can't believe the apathy towards the motorcyclist here on this thread. Unless you ride you really don't have any place to comment on what the motorcyclist did because you don't know what it's like for us.

Did the motorcyclist over-react? Sure he probably didn't need to completely stop. But I understand why he did.

Was the copy wrong for twisting the law about writing him a "shit-load of tickets" yes absolutely. He was following entirely too close.