>> ^SDGundamX:

I thought there was something wrong with the collar too, but actually it is just a giant bow-tie. You can see it clearly in this other vid of the same cat. I think the cat just slipped on the surface of the TV when jumping.


Ya, The rear paws just go right out from under it. Poor launch. "Houston we have a problem."
Reminds me of the one video of the squirrel on the fence that tries to I guess jump on the roof and goes head first in to the wall. The sad part is I giggle more every time I watch it.

It's one thing to laugh if, a skateboarder messes up a trick and lands with his crotch on a railing, but can walk it off.

It's a very different one if the skateboarder lands face first and is bleeding all over the place, or lands poorly and breaks his arm rather obviously (his arm getting all bent out of shape).

The difference is, people who laugh at the second situation, are sadistic. There's no other way around it. Not to mention if the person getting hurt happens to be a child. Then you're sadistic and cruel.

I would have laughed at this video, if the child landed on a softer surface, like grass maybe, and didn't land head first.

This video has been seconded as a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof seconded with isdupe by SlipperyPete.

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by Duckman33. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

Sorry man. *dupeof=http://videosift.com/video/Prisoner-Dives-Head-First-Into-Toilet

>> ^MilkmanDan:

I somewhat disagree that this is unusually stupid for a kid ... I doubt that he was falling fast enough with enough momentum to kill him, rather than just break some bones (not to make light of the severity of that).


A child falling from one story with a head-first landing has a 50% mortality rate according to this medical literature review: www.kmuh.org.tw/www/ed/teaching/Fall%20from%20height.ppt (slide 23)

>> ^lavoll:
taser happy overweight pigs


You know who else is overweight? The black man in this video and 55% of Americans!

We could apply violent pig to anyone... Like to all the common thugs on the street, just like all the people in America... Of course, then who could we blame for brutality? Not the everyday man because that would take introspection as to why society as a whole fails...

Remember, all cops come from flesh and blood and some are stupid. What would have been the appropriate course though? Go after him? (Answer, no.) Wait him out (Possibly, but figure he can wait up to about two days... ) Tase him? (Answer, depends if you think you can safely take him down. Considering everyone thinks they are more capable than they truly are, these cops prolly did too.)

Also, if there is a suspected gun, the cops who want to return home disable as soon as possible. The cops that want to test their speed and accuracy wait until they are dead. When they hit him with the first taser, what was behind him? If it was land, they needed to try and tase him right then and there (While he was seated. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a moron... It was BECAUSE he was SEATED that the opportunity was right. Of course the view is bloacked...) If the first deployment would have succeeded, the man who threatened to take life would have been fine. You say lethal force wasn’t warranted and you are correct, but the taser is only a potentially lethal weapon. Just like the hands and feet are a potential lethal weapon… A gun on the other hand, if used correctly will nearly always be lethal (Cause death or great bodily harm...)

If I was in that situation, and I was law enforcement (which I am not,) here is a potential scenario:

Fat man on bridge threatens to off himself. May be packing due to his 50 page history, reports from family AND state of agitation (So, first thing I know is that he may murder himself and any "Pig headed mother-fing cops"--as come others call all cops here on this site.) We respond, try to wait him out. Looks bad, because he is saying f-you, I will do it. We wait till he sits, there is ground behind him (Cannot see from this camera footage,) and then deploy the less-than-lethal taser... It fails. He gets up, makes a dash for the security of the bridge but also a better drop point. Take him down or let him fall? Hrm, hard to say because now he knows what will happen to him if he stops and therefore, he prolly won't stop... Taser deployed... And he falls. Slightly better outcome than if he had done a head-first dive of his own accord, which is of course what he promised to do... But bad outcome anyways…

I've always been impressed with Kucinich...he's absolutely consistent on his stance(s). I was also tickled with the idea of a red-headed first lady (with piercings!)

Maybe someday...

>> ^GoodAttorney:
Why not head first?


What, like this?

Why not head first?

I'm a bit disappointed - this is a *long series. I was looking forward to it being a Hitchens vs. Fry debate based on the headline - this is actually a classic 4-way debate, which is fine - but we missed out on some serious potential comedy and went for.... wow.

OMG Hitchens is such an ass right off the bat. DUDE - the Crusades? Why should we apologize for that? They were AWESOME. Have you played Assassin's Creed?

But seriously, Poland was historically the most tolerant country in Europe. That's why the Jews fled ENGLAND and other Western countries to POLAND, which gave the Jewish people a home. Not to say that Eastern Europe is a haven of tolerance these days, but if you're going to cite how things were a thousand years ago, I'm going to call you on your b.s. as well. where they were then slaughtered by Nazis.

Oh, who denied asylum to boatloads of Jewish refugees? The oh-so-enlightened Western countries. Yeah, bravo hypocrite.

Oh, and Hitchens, FOAD - at least that's what you're encouraging other people to do by encouraging them to have sex with everybody instead of being monogamous? And hey, if you don't use condoms properly you can in fact get infected - so big huge caveat guys.

Condemning Fry? We don't do that.

This isn't a debate on his part, Hitchens is being a liar and a slanderer. Shame on him.

Good on the MP for her rebuttal. After all, the God of Catholics is Jewish. Accusing Catholics anti-Semitic is beyond ridiculous.

Now Fry's intro, on the other hand, reeks of class even if I don't agree with the overall POV. And what's this about "torturing" Galileo? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei Source please.

Also, Fry, you doth protest too much. You are not morally evil. You can choose to be good or bad, just being a homosexual does not mean anything about your personal morality - God loves you and Catholics love you and welcome you to the Church. If you choose to exclude yourself through ridiculous and misleading claims. Obsessed with sex? No, I don't know which church you're hearing about, but that seems to be what you're obsessed with, because it's the only thing you talk about.

FYI, there's a difference between loving respect and your hysterical "fear". I'm sorry if you were abused as child - but there's a ginormous difference.

"Of which policy are you most ashamed" - is that the new version of "have you stopped beating your wife senator?" Madness.

The Bishop's speech was a bit dry, but his response was spot on.

Oh snap, clever response from Widdencombe, keeping in the spirit of the debate. In reality, women will probably be allowed to become priests (priestesses?) one day - but you have to keep in mind ridiculous schisms would result if they jumped head-first into a barrel of madness and change. Just see how up-in-arms Americans get over changes to health care. Things are a bit more subtle and complicated than that.

Catholics aren't there to judge you - they're not going to declare Fry to be in a state of mortal sin (i.e. do you love God?), that's something for him to deal with in his own conscience, as we all do.

Bonus observation: note which side admits humility. That means admitting you're not perfect but are working on becoming better.

Catholics win the debate by default. You can't come up with lies and falsehoods and come out ahead. Proper debates will include an opportunity for final rebuttals. Not to mention con side picked a single topic instead of perhaps 20 potential lines of conversation - cons resorted to falsehoods, and fails to counter the fact that the Church is a Force for Good.

I've witnessed properly judged debates, and know the voting was simply silly but revelatory of what you witness here - overall a weak debate, with one side offering up solid points but not really engaging the audience, the other simply resorting to hysterics and demagoguery.

I'd be much more interested in seeing the four debaters arguing the opposite POVs, this was rather stultifying.

You are obviously much better at finding dupes than I am. Or maybe siftbot just enjoys torturing me.

Dupofed to the first.


In reply to this comment by demon_ix:
I tried to sift your Snow-Diving Fox video yesterday, and found these two:

http://www.videosift.com/video/Fox-Hunts-in-Snow-Jumps-and-Dives-Down-Head-First
http://www.videosift.com/video/Snow-diving-fox

Neither is a direct dupe, but all three are pretty close, and the first one has the same footage, without narration.

Up to you

This video has been declared a duplicate; transferring votes to the original video and killing this dupe - dupeof declared by arvana.

*dupeof=http://www.videosift.com/video/Fox-Hunts-in-Snow-Jumps-and-Dives-Down-Head-First

I tried to sift your Snow-Diving Fox video yesterday, and found these two:

http://www.videosift.com/video/Fox-Hunts-in-Snow-Jumps-and-Dives-Down-Head-First
http://www.videosift.com/video/Snow-diving-fox

Neither is a direct dupe, but all three are pretty close, and the first one has the same footage, without narration.

Up to you