Yes, I understand they are taught to shoot to kill, I just think it's wrong to do so.
If it was an unavoidable situation of a single officer against a single offender, I would agree. Since there were 3, one of them could have safely moved to trying non-lethal force, with a double helping of deadly force instantly backing him up if it doesn't work. If not taser, bean bags, sticky foam, flash bang, etc. They have many means of non-lethal force that work almost every time. That should be the normal, daily way of doing it. That's why they call for backup. If they're just going to all shoot to kill anyway, why not just save time and money and do it alone? If they're only going to try lethal force, can we stop paying for all that non-lethal equipment we give them?
Shooting rapid fire and randomly in the direction of a 'perp' puts the public at risk. The first 5+ shots all missed him and flew down the street, I'm curious if anyone was hit.
If they don't even attempt non-lethal means of halting the criminal, there WAS a much better alternative. If lethal force is acceptable in any unknown situation, it's become a war of 'us vs them' where any police stop may end in one or both parties being killed because the cop wasn't sure he was safe, that's not a good outcome. When there are multiple officers, at least one should always TRY non-lethal force. If it's appropriate to have multiple guns drawn and pointed at a human's head, it's appropriate to try to taser them or bean bag them before shooting a full clip of live rounds.

If 'potential threat' is the only metric needed to justify homicide, every cop on the beat could be legally shot. They are all armed, and known to shoot to kill at the slightest provocation. Killing them would be self defense in every case if that was the only thing needed to make it acceptable, as they are all not just 'potential threats', but actual deadly threats known to be armed and homicidal.
That's why that theory doesn't work in my eyes. It leads to more killings, which leads to more fear, which leads to more killings, which leads to more fear.... Cops are trained and armed and given bullet proof vests, cut proof gloves/sleeves, and have massive backup. If they intentionally put themselves in a position where they are alone against an unknown threat, then kill out of fear of the situation they put themselves in, how is that not inappropriate? I really don't get it.
(I do get that sometimes (rarely) it's unavoidable, but most times a little patience and a little less 'contempt of cop- punishable by death' would diffuse situations that police instead often escalate into homicide because of a complete lack of patience or empathy, or out of anger because they were 'disrespected' by not having their commands followed instantly)

Dawkins can be a dick about some things ("mild rape", etc), but I've only ever seen him be courteous to his opponents even in the face of overwhelming stupidity. He's blunt, sure, but he's never rude.

I think if there was a well funded organisation that was dedicated to promoting complete and utter bullshit that was contrary to my life's work, I would probably have less patience with religious nutter than Dawkins.

Besides, we NEED an attack dog. Just because he does an unpleasant job doesn't mean the job doesn't need doing. He's responsible for raising the visibility of atheism globally and that can only be a good thing IMO.

They actually had a little fireworks show after this; so I was slightly lying, but I wouldn't want to test anyone's patience...

Idk, I think it starts off life as an ironic exclamation and sort of slips into your vocab. Personally I prefer to spell it out - "el oh el". As lol is an acronym I believe this is probably a more proper pronunciation, but it also sounds more deliberate, and therefore ironic.

But yes. It is exactly replacing that faked laugh that we produce both as a sort of social courtesy to others who made an effort to make us smile, or to communicate that we recognise a humourous situation. Why use it? Well, why use any colloquialism/slang?

Frankly I'd rather be the dickhead that uses it than the dickhead that thinks adding "Selfie" to the dictionary represents an erosion of the language. I really have no patience for those that seem to think we should enclose our language in a glass case and play with it delicately lest we damage the exhibit.

Granted, but it was a request, not a command.
How about I ask them to just stop acting like they KNOW the unknowable, and insist they preface their religious conversations with 'this is what I believe' instead of 'this is how it is'?
While I would prefer to not have to hear about other's beliefs constantly, my real issue is with them being offered as 'fact' that I MUST accept in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
My problem also lies with the fact that most people (not all) can't discuss their beliefs without proselytizing, that's especially so for religious zealots. I would have much more patience with the topic if that were not the case.

Dear non snow drivers,

In the absence of a winch, preferably a tow truck winch, this a great example of how to get unstuck.

- Keep the wheels straight, or as straight as possible. The more the wheels are turned the more difficult it is to extricate out of the stuck position.
- DON'T spin tires. They guy in the video didn't even have the car on. The more you spin, the more you dig, the more you dig the "stucker" you get. As soon as you hear tire spinning back off and try again.
- Rocking is good. The more you can gain momentum from rocking the better. It will let you spin the tires less and avoid digging the car deeper into the snow.
- Dig a trench for the tires if you can. The deeper the snow the better chance you have of catching the car on excess snow which then makes it even harder to get out. Digging trenches for the path out will help not build up snow on the way out. Foot, shovel, anything you can get to help the car out.
- Sand or kitty litter will help the drive wheels get some traction on the way out. Better yet chains will get you out of most anything, but you only usually see chains in mountainous areas or back country scenarios.
- Two words... Snow Tires (but they only make sense if you live in a temperament climate that receives snow fall, but man do they make a difference).

From the video it looks like first snow fall of the year. The tire tracks expose leaves and dirt underneath. First snow fall in my city means about 80-100 accidents in one day, its horrible. Changing mindsets from non-winter driving to winter driving is an exercise in observation and patience.

Probably poor judgement on the part of the videographer. I think the atmosphere of all the other comments, day in and day out, weighs on most women to such an extent that those innocent courtesies, and any other comment from a man, have simply eroded the patience of those who are sensitive to living in such environments.
It will stop, someday, but what kills my spirit is understanding how the passage of time, the record of history, and knowing the calculation of both of those respective of whatever your experience you struggle with, means you'll likely have to exist in that world for the duration of your life within it.
I have struggled with things my entire life that, to this day, aren't things that will be recognized, let alone rectified, by the time my life is over, and knowing that while looking toward the future you have here is nearly unbearable.
Didn't mean to bring the whole thing back to a personal element. Just meant to express that I understand the cycles of human progress and the frustration of having the foresight to endure them.

Thanks @kulpims.

Ive been a backer for a year and a half. So I've had access to their "pre pre pre pre pre pre Alpha" for some time now which allows you to walk around the hangar and see the ships you've purchased and climb into the cockpits and walk around, etc. Limited multiplayer dog fighting is available and some co-op modes. but not many of the ships are available for combat yet.

I've purposely not played it very much though. I could never be a game tester despite how much I game. I don't have a ton of patience for bugs and I just don't want to get burnt out on the game. I'd rather play the released game. but it is wild to see it grow and evolve right before your eyes.

Believe it or not though. I do get Mordhaus's frustration. The crowdfunding campaign has been going on for WAY longer than anyone has intended. CR himself never expected this kind of support. I've got hype fatigue myself. I get worn out following this game. the downvote was unnecessary though.

Jews have the old testament.
Christians have the old testament and new testament.
Muslims have the old testament, new testament, and yet a newer testament.

All 3 share the old testament.
The 'violence promoting' scriptures are found in the old testament - which all 3 have in common.

Reza is right.
If people want peace, the religious of them simply ignore the violent edicts of their religions.
If they want to be violent, the religious of them legitimize it with excuses from their religions.

He's also right about the national hypocrisy. Al-Qaeda at the time of 9/11 was a pet organization of members of the Saudi royal family.
But instead of going after the Saudis (who also today finance ISIS), we go after 2 countries that are unrelated to the attack.

Look at today's irony. Assad in Syria (who we wanted deposed because he was friendlier to Russia than the U.S., and allowed Russian bases on Syrian soil [in the middle east]) is now fighting ISIS, while we ally with the Saudis who are supporting ISIS.

We also didn't mind supporting the Mujahedin (Jihadi fighters) in Afghanistan when they were fighting our enemy. We had no problem throwing Afghanistan into the dark ages when it suited us.

Ultimately, extremist Islam is a foil, meant to rouse western people's emotions. As national policy, we don't _actually_ do anything to stop it, we just use it as an excuse to do whatever else is of national interest.
Who would be the boogey man if extremist Islam was gone? We need a boogey man if we want to keep excusing and paying for a large military. People simply don't have the foresight and patience to maintain a strong military without someone scaring them into support. Particularly now, when we don't have the manufacturing capacity to quickly build a large military.

However, Reza is ignoring Turkey's and the Pacific islander's Muslim problems. Indonesia and the Philippines have extremist Muslim organizations doing attacks home (Philippines also has Christian terrorists). Turkey is a large source of Muslim fighters pouring into Syria.



The various related religions also have historical developmental differences.

Jews were for a long time in such minorities that they did not have the political capability of waging any campaign of violence. They were either too small, or too busy being occupied by European powers (Rome, etc).

Christians did have a long period of majority, starting around 400ad when Rome decided that a good way to control/pacify any dissent within the empire was to make the empire 1 religion and make Rome the head of that religion. They elected Christianity as the state religion, forced everyone in the Roman empire to convert, and you had a continent's worth of Christians.
This included north Africa and Middle East - and is when Jews (by now called Palestinians) were forced to convert from Judaism to Christianity (**and few hundred years later forced to convert from Christianity to Islam).

Although, Christians had the benefit of the Inquisition(s) to temper their enthusiasm for Christianity. A large part of the population was killed for consorting with the devil. Once it got so bad that everyone knew someone who had been convicted and killed - and everyone was sure that those killed were innocent, it cast a large doubt on Christianity as whole. People questioned if the devil even exists, or if it's all a sham. The distrust and resentment paved the way for the eventual birth of Deism and Empiricism. A time when the scientific method and physical observation started to take over.

Islam is still a young religion. They still have to experience their religion becoming all powerful, and the inquisitions that inevitably come from absolute power. The one good thing about Islamic extremism is that it makes the people living under those conditions more likely to suffer. Once the suffering becomes so pervasive that everyone is suffering, the people will start to dislike/distrust their religion, and the extremism will resolve itself from the inside out - like it did with Christianity.

The bigger problem would be if things are 'too tolerable', and the religion grows more extreme (no one is inclined to say 'no'). The biggest problem would be if the religious leaders 'solve' the balance issue, and manage to stabilize the oppression at a level that is as extreme as it can be while still being permanently sustainable. Then the religious leaders can live the life of power without the threat of deposition.

-scheherazade

The vast majority of people never have contact with police officers.

The vast majority of people who HAVE contact with police officers are treated civilly and go on with their lives.

The vast majority of people know that you don't give a bunch of shit to police officers. If you do, you take a chance on an outcome that won't make you happy.

The vast majority of people who are arrested on a weekly basis know that they will pay a small fine, or do a couple of days in jail, and take it as a cost of doing business.

A small number of police contacts end up with someone being treated for a bruise or cut, or a loose tooth, or pepper spray in the eyes.

A small number of police contacts end up dead and the vast majority of them instigated the violence.

You people expect cops to act perfectly, have the negotiating skills of Henry Kissinger, the compassion of Mother Theresa and the patience of Job, the martial skill of a UFC fighter, and the targeting skill of Annie Oakley, when what you should be doing is looking at your own behavior and seeing how that leads to your own fate.

I think your efforts are commendable, but doomed to fail. Trance is not interested in learning, and when you teach him something he can't find a crazed, wrong link to discount your knowledge with, he'll simply ignore it and move on to more and more infantile argument. He recently became my second ignore.
I am glad you called him out on his doctorate in underwater basket weaving, unfortunately for us all it does not help him understand science in the least, or the scientific method, but somehow convinces him that it does.
EDIT: Oh, "doctorate in Social 'science'", which he must mistakenly believe is a true science and not a misnomer.
I see he continues with his intentional miss-reading and/or miss-quoting, claiming you said purely consensus is the ONLY way science progresses, not that it's the way that progression is accepted by the scientific community. Me thinks this miss-understanding is an intentional miss-statement in order to continue his 'debate' by constantly changing either his own, or your stance on the subject.
I also noted the passive aggressive (and terrible English) statement " the manner in which I posted the links may not have been "fair," ", to me implying you just couldn't assimilate that much information, not conceding that it was all an attempt at an overwhelming avalanche of BS propaganda.
Kudos on your reasoned, patient approach. I ran out of patience with the kindergarten argument style and quit him.

here is the thing though,based purely on my own subjective observations:
your rage is tempered with a humanity that rarely comes across as rage but rather patience.

if you are not a teacher...you should be.
or a zen buddhist...
i confuse the two.

Yep. Same here EVERY night! I admire her patience!

I bet the kids had some swedes after dinner

OH. MY. GOD.

That man has the patience of a saint. I would have lost the plot after about 60 seconds of that bullshit.

edit: 6 minutes later.... AAARRERRRGGHHHHHH JUST DISCONNECT THE MOTHERFUCKING SERVICE YOU UTTER BASTARD!!!!!

Many details including how all these people came to power, who was really in the region, how war in this region works, and most importantly not asking the basic question of: "Why are the borders of Iraq important?" (think about it).

Anyone reading this is fully capable of figuring it out on their own, but it takes reading historical accounts how how this region came to be in the state it is in rather than watching a couple of three minute videos and rallying behind western powers again.

- Or, as I like to put it, "things the internet doesn't have the patience for".