Haha.. I hope it's his wife yelling at him over the phone. All muffled and angry.

Weird how they yelled what sounded like "YEAH!" when it worked. I wonder if that's a 'yay' sound and common to humans in general.

Cards Against Humanity. The game that made me yell, "Damn it! I played my Child Abuse card too early!"

This is the point of thought experiments. They're not supposed to be unsolvable zen koans. They're supposed to help you identify and examine the fundamentals of your whatever philosophical model for a given topic. This one is obviously doing its job, because when you can construct statements like 'perfect certainty makes inaction as culpable as action' then you already have a richer understanding of ethics than say 95% of the population.

Many people give the opposite answer to yours; they don't think you should take an innocent life deliberately, even if it is for a greater good. Now, are these stupid people? Yes. And you'll find more and more of them when you recast the question in increasingly uncomfortable terms: Should you shove a fat man in front of the train to slow it down, knowing the five will then have time to escape? Should a doctor harvest the vital organs of a perfectly healthy patient to save five otherwise healthy people who happen to be in need of various organ transplants?

Real world solutions and complications to these questions are irrelevant. Petri dishes don't exist in nature but you don't slap them out of biologists hands and yell at them to do real science in the real world. And isn't the fact that so many people would decline to assassinate baby Hitler informative in itself?

I actually got in trouble over this in a class during my school years. Like this video, the teacher neglected to mention anything about the people being unable to move. So I said, "I would just yell to all of them that a trolley was coming and to get off the tracks."

Well, of course the teacher was not prepared for this answer so she tried to modify the situation. I got somewhat irate, as I recall, and said she was cheating. She sent me to the office, where I got a swat for disturbing the class.

tl;dr

Don't try to think outside of the box in school.

All it takes is someone to yell "Dragonite in the park!!" to get a reaction like this.

'course the KFC could have been giving away free popcorn chicken.

I disagree that it is victim-blaming.

He is honking his horn and yelling and neither speeding up nor slowing down in the face of a car coming for him.

Drive defensively. So every time they run that PSA, that is victim blaming?

She was totally in the wrong. You saw I said that right?

And he didn't drive defensively.

As a car driver (encased in a metal box), I don't argue with someone who is coming right for me. I try to get the heck out of the way (and curse at them the entire way).

Now, maybe I am missing something -- you can correct me if I am wrong about my observations. I"m not a motorcycle driver. Maybe he couldn't have slowed down, sped up, or done some other maneuver. Looked to me like he could have.

Please do correct me if my observations are incorrect.

(And might I inquire as to why in particular it is odd to see me "victim blame"? Not that I think I am?)

The supreme court is in a position to interpret the law because that's how our system works.
The Judicial's role is to INTERPRET the law that congress writes.
Due process is followed. You mean if strict, literal interpretation with no thought were the rule. It's not though.
Yes, the judicial interprets the legislature....so their interpretation may differ from the specific words in a law.
No, it's a matter of what the courts say is enforceable. Our system does not change laws because some, even most people disagree with the law. Just look at gun laws if you think differently. The people are willing to enforce more background checks and willing to bar anyone on the watch list, the legislature isn't. Enough of everyone is 'on board with twisting the rules', but they can't because the courts say they can't.
Really? You think people won't panic if you yell "fire" in a crowded room. OK, make sure you NEVER stand between me and a door then.

Um...yeah...you just keep thinking that "well regulated" has nothing to do with being regulated. I disagree.

I don't understand your point about eminent domain....Full Definition of eminent. 1 : standing out so as to be readily perceived or noted : conspicuous. 2 : jutting out : projecting. 3 : exhibiting eminence especially in standing above others in some quality or position : prominent.

Sounds the same to me.
-Newt

The supreme court is in a position to take liberties because there is no court above it to which one can appeal.

Courts have a mandate to judge compliance with the law - not to redefine the law (that's the legislature's role).

If due process was followed, courts would find cases like 'yelling fire' as protected, and refer the law to the legislature to exempt-from-1st-amentment-protection any inappropriate behaviors via new written constitutional law.

As it stands, there are many judicial opinions that are enforcible via the legal system, that are never written down as law by the legislature.

Again, it's a matter of what people are willing to enforce. The courts are just people. The law is only as important to them as they will it to be. If everyone is on board with twisting the rules, then that's the norm.

(aside : Yelling fire is a stupid example. If you did it, everyone would look around, and then look at you, and would be like "wtf are you talking about?")



Words are written to convey meanings. They don't exist for their own sake. The 1791 meaning of "well regulated" is similar to today's meaning "well adjusted". It would be best summarized as "orderly" or "properly functioning". It has nothing to do with government regulation.

Similarly, "eminent domain" means "obvious domain" (obvious because republic, and every citizen (i.e. statesman) owns the country collectively, and you never actually owned your land, you only had a title to be the sole user).
Sounds weird by todays' standards, but back then the norm was that regular people had nothing and the crown (and its friends) owned everything. Republic sounded quite progressive at the time. Remember, the U.S. revolution was just prior to the French revolution. Kingdoms were the norm.

Sounds a bit different when translated from 1700's english to 2000's english.

-scheherazade

Stuart Lee is exactly the thing I'm talking about. I'm not saying that you SHOULD make fun of muslims or islam just to arbitrarily balance things out. I'm saying that you simply can't, or else.

Because when someone makes a joke or a cartoon, people get beheaded, cartoonists get shot with AK-47's, riots ensue, and clerics wish death on people. And at the very least people start yelling "racist".

I don't agree that the clip I've posted is satirizing the situation. He's pointing out that he knows what would happen if he did make a joke about it. The joke being "I'm not that stupid to do that".

Consider then that there ARE actually exceptions to total 'freedom of speech'. You cannot, for instance, yell "fire" in a crowded theater if there's no fire, or incite a riot. Speech that is clearly dangerous with no other purpose is not protected.

So was the yelling a dub...because it was funny.

Your video, Lewis Black Yells It As It Is Once Again, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

*Best thing about being French is you get to yell...

VIVE LA FRANCE