He sounds like a real charmer, but I totally respect that he wants to keep his dog focused and that you shouldn't get all googly eyed at the first dog you see. Another reason I never assume it is ok to how shall I say..."recognize" the service pet is I often see them in training and you would just be making the trainers job harder.

When the average cop lightens up on the public, I will lighten up on them...but not before.
I grew up having total respect for police, their repeated actions have caused me to reconsider that.
I do not respect liars or bullies, and I've never once met a cop that wasn't one or the other if not both.
If I leave my civil service job once a week or more to play around with my kids, using departmental equipment and authority, while complaining I need more assistance and overtime to complete my duties, I should be fired for dereliction, imo.
Cops have squandered their benefit of a doubt and public good will, they have to earn it back, not just demand it. It's the pessimism of reality that jaded me, personal experiences, not just internet reports of bad behavior.

Tom Cruise may be crazy, but damn is he a hard working actor. I don't think anybody can question his commitment to his projects. Everybody who works with him says he's like a machine when he's on the job, just solely focused on getting the shot and making the movie as entertaining as possible.

Stuff like this any other actor would get a stunt double to do, but he's said repeatedly that he always wants to do the stunts himself if possible because he feels the audience can tell when the doubles take over. And the stuntmen totally respect him because at this point in his career he's as good at it as any veteran stuntman.

I wonder though if Tom Cruise movies have higher insurance costs because he insists on doing his own stunts.

@eoe
jesus christ dude..
could you be any more presumptuous?

first off,i didnt call you out specifically.
i rather enjoyed you and newts exchange,but my commentary was not addressing nor interjecting in that conversation.

second,the only argument (if you even want to call it that) that i proposed was to cut the moral absolutes out,because they are bullshit.

now maybe you do not engage in the morality argument that many ..MANY ...vegans DO attempt to utilize to better make their point,and hats off to you if you see the hypocrisy of such a tactic.

now please understand i am not ignoring that there is a morality factor in being a vegan and i totally respect that.what i am stating is to not become burdened with absolutes and attempting to use morality to further a position..or you will be called out on it and rightly so.

thirdly,
your comment is actually a straw man,not mine.
you posit a position i didnt take in order to refute that imaginary position.

which you took a step further by accusing me of not addressing certain aspects of an argument that i only tacitly referred to and in no specific or detailed way.

in fact almost your entire comment towards me is a fabricated argument that i never had with you.

so who are you arguing/debating with?
because i can say with some authority that it is not me.

maybe you took my tone or words as a direct assault on you or what you have written,but as anybody here will attest,i have no problem calling someone out directly.conversely,i have no problem being called out (if my fly is open,please let me know).

so if that is the case,allow me to offer an olive branch:
my girlfriend of many years is a devout vegan.
so i am full aware of the reasons why she became a vegan (at the tender age of seven,no shit) and for her the decision was mostly a moral one i.e:cruelty,abuse etc etc.

when we first started dating she attempted to use every tactic in the book to get me to see the barbarity in my callous and cruel meat eating ways.she would send me videos of the most horrific abuse of animals,slaughterhouse horror stories..i am sure you may be familiar with many of her tactics in attempting to reveal the moral imperative to stop this torture and abuse.

which i responded (much like alluded to in my original comment) by showing her videos of the horrific abuses perpetrated upon human beings just so she could have cheap clothing and those electronic gadgets she loves so much.

which of course made her feel absolute,crushing guilt.almost to the point where it paralyzed her.because she is an adorable sweetheart who genuinely cares for not only people but animals.

which leads me to the main point i was making:
you cannot make a vegan argument based solely on moral absolutes,because it will fall apart within seconds and you come across as a pretentious twat.

so YOU can make the decision to be a vegan based on moral grounds and that is totally acceptable,but you cannot take the moral high ground when debating veganism to further a point,because we ALL bear responsibility in the suffering of others.be they animal or human.

do you see what i am saying?

if you choose to indulge moral absolutes,then you will be exposed as a hypocrite,because when we use absolutes,that metric has to be applied equally to all factors of living.

which leaves us with the "distinctions" and the reason i say those are boring is because it becomes a narcissistic exercise of self-righteous twattery.

i recycle.
i refuse to shop at walmart.
i do not eat fast food.
i only buy organic.
i try to shop local.

all these things i do,not because they actually make a difference,but rather they make me feel better about myself.it gives me the "feel goods".even though i am full aware that in the larger picture,what i am doing means next to nothing.

but it means something to me.
and i think that is really the only real argument a vegan has to rely on to express their viewpoint.

i have seen the videos.
i am aware how awful,cruel and barbaric farming animals can be,but i like bacon.

i am an asshole.

@coolhund
dude..chill.
while i totally respect and admire your passion,@dingens is correct in pointing out your ad-hom swipe.you made overly broad assumptions about him with zero evidence to back those assumptions up,at least on this thread there is no evidence.

i think you owe him an apology.

you appear,to me anyways,to be taking any opinions or criticisms as a personal attack upon you and your stance.

i do not really see people disagreeing with you,but rather pointing out the complex dynamics.this does not equate to disagreement,just a desire to refine the parameters of the discussion.

i totally get what you are trying to say and i agree with you,but in your (understandable) frustration you are lashing out at people who do not deserve your ire.

you are correct to point out that the elephant in the room is never questioned,never mind discussed.i.e:america creates the situation,then plays the victim.

which is your basic hegelian dialectic:problem-reaction-solution.

the real discussion is POWER vs POWERLESSNESS,and the abuses of power to the detriment of society,locally and globally.

at least thats how i was reading your commentary.i could have it all wrong but i do admire your passion.

if i could offer some unsolicited advice my friend:do not become so invested in your passions that you forget the plot.the people who have commented here are not your enemies.

they are just commenting,and maybe if you feel they are not understanding what you are laying down..clarify your position by engaging with these people to collectively formulate a better understanding.no need or reason to lash out at them,because maybe they just misunderstood what you were trying to say.

oh god...just realized i am that uncle on the holidays that tries to keep the peace by getting everyone drunk.

ok everybody!
beers on me!
lets go get drunk!

No my butt is just fine.

I really liked his Insomnia remake where he had nice performances from Pacino and Williams and Memento was amazing.

He's simply not good when he tries to do epic/action films. There's a good video on here examining the cuts and shot choices in the second Batman film and how it creates a confused narrative i.e the action has to be consistent and make sense. I can't place the link, something like "in the cut" I think.

BTW there was an odd media reaction around Batman (or it could have been Inception) where various critics were suggesting he was the next Kubrik. Anyone with common sense would see that's nonsense. He needs a few more Insomnias/Mementos under his belt before that connection is even dreamed about.

I do totally respect his desire to avoid CGI where possible which should be applauded from the rooftops.

Your first paragraph was going so well. Why'd ya have to ruin it with the second one?

If you're ignorant about how abusive random cops can be, then go learn something. The driver didn't know which type of cop these were, and it doesn't matter. They chose to be cops themselves, and they know full well what the image of cops is among the populace, and how people like the driver (and me) see cops (whether rightly or wrongly), and they still choose to put on the uniform each day. Dealing with people who don't like cops is part of the job of a cop. If you don't have the ego to handle rare moments like this, then you're in the wrong business.>> ^zebishop:

I have a complete and total respect for those two cops. They handled the situation way better than I would have in their shoes.
I can't help thinking (and I might be wrong) that the guy filming had start speaking because he realised that this cop wasn't gonna hit him, insult him or force him into incourteous sex acts. It even look like he tried the next thing that could piss a cop off (as I saw in other video), ask him who he was so he can be identified.

Sigh.>> ^zebishop:

I have a complete and total respect for those two cops. They handled the situation way better than I would have in their shoes.
I can't help thinking (and I might be wrong) that the guy filming had start speaking because he realised that this cop wasn't gonna hit him, insult him or force him into incourteous sex acts. It even look like he tried the next thing that could piss a cop off (as I saw in other video), ask him who he was so he can be identified.

I have a complete and total respect for those two cops. They handled the situation way better than I would have in their shoes.

I can't help thinking (and I might be wrong) that the guy filming had start speaking because he realised that this cop wasn't gonna hit him, insult him or force him into incourteous sex acts. It even look like he tried the next thing that could piss a cop off (as I saw in other video), ask him who he was so he can be identified.

What I was initially arguing against was blankfist's assertion that if we ban carrying guns in public we might as well ban cars and steak knives because those can kill people too.

I acknowledged that they are dangerous but that society accepts the risks because cars and steak knives have primary uses that aren't killing or destroying things. Where as a gun's only use is killing/destroying targets, so it's much much harder to justify carrying it around in public.

Now of course, if you're by yourself in the wilderness, this is another matter, I never advocated for the total banning of guns, in fact, in the home I totally respect an individual's right to keep firearms, but walking around the street with one is unnecessary and just provokes people in fear/fight reactions which makes no one safer.

Now, if you know of any other uses for guns, please enlighten me, otherwise stop picking at my arguments out of context.
>> ^smooman:

>> ^MarineGunrock:
If I'm shooting someone legally, it's not murder.>> ^PalmliX:
>> ^MarineGunrock:
@PalmliX: "They have no secondary use, except maybe target practice."
No, you're just wrong there. Guns, when carried legally, can stop someone who is using one illegally.

Right... that doesn't change the fact that they only have one use. If your shooting someone legally to stop them from using a gun illegally, are you not still using the gun for it's singular intended purpose?


furthermore, insisting that guns serve one and only one purpose really just shows your complete ignorance of these tools.

I believe because it brings me comfort. Praying makes me feel good and connected to something beyond myself. That's all I need. We really don't know if there is a "Soul" or not, or where a "Soul" goes after the body has passed. Faith and belief get me through each day with the idea that the daily struggle, if not rewarded in life, is rewarded in the afterlife. I think that precludes a religion, and a religion is just a matter of choice. I think their issue is more organized religion, especially some of the born again Christian groups which drive me crazy in their zealous righteousness. I think you can have faith and belief without excluding and without judging. If God and Jesus can accept and love a prostitute, then why the hell can't a Christian love a gay man or an atheist?
I have total respect to all and any beliefs or the lack there of. But I can not tolerate ignorance and closed mindedness.

We spent 15 million trying to win votes for the 2018 world cup, perfect example of money wasted. Our current government is making all the wrong budget cuts. Total respect for the students protesting despite the cold weather, yes there was some violence but in most towns and cities the demonstrations were peaceful - it's just London that attracts most of the troublemakers since they know that's where the media cameras will be.

Reality is that this is probably the first big protest of quite a few over the next few years concerning a number of issues due to arise in the UK. Our governments are being told what to do by well-financed corporations who do not have the considerations of society as a whole foremost in their thoughts. Man I hate saying that, 10 years ago I remember hearing that same stuff from conspiracy theorists and thinking it was absurd. Now it's so blatantly obvious that corporations and their wallets dictate a lot of what happens within the governments of many countries.

What has corporate lobbying got to do with student tuition fees? The big companies that soak up billions of pounds of tax-payers' money on delayed and incompetent projects have kept many of their lucrative deals, often signed by civil servants who don't understand what they're signing up for. All those projects and deals need to be reevaluated, and the work agreed upon by skilled individuals in the public sector who understand what is being agreed with the supplier. We've got a great IT skill base in the UK and more coming out of our universities (providing tuition fees don't prevent a lot of skilled individuals attending in the near future), why are we sending billions of pounds out of the country to companies that make it a matter of expectation that there will be failures and missed deadlines? Sure most of the equipment and off-the-shelf software solutions will come from the USA and that's fine, it's the skilled labour we need to source locally.

I could go on forever but I think I've spewed enough incoherent crud for one post

Whoa whoa whoa. I am in no way supporting either candidate, but we all wonder why our government is struggling when it's run by unqualified "celebrities." However, I totally respect a politician accepting defeat in a debate.

Why are politicians immune to criticism? Is it because they represent a MUCH larger party and their ill-planned agendas? Kudos Ms. McMahon for simply saying, "Yup, ya got me." That's true debate and political "sportsmanship."

Now, let's move on to the next topic...

Teacher fail. You can TOTALLY respect someone as a person and not agree with them at the same time.

I totally respect his passion. *promote