Congratulations! Your video, His Mom Definitely Won This Battle, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 183 Badge!

Your video, His Mom Definitely Won This Battle, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Your video, White tiger kitten scares his mom!, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

Reminds me of Sunday mornings at my friend Paul's house back in high school. Only it was his mom with the broom handle. Same attitude from us kids.

True story.

So, because one guy, Noah, sucked hard as a proselytizer, God murdered everyone else?
It must have been his failing since his message was so true and undeniable, yet it was denied and ignored, right? Why not just kill him and prove the message by miracle? Better, why not make everyone KNOW, not guess or believe, he exists and go from there. Using unverified middle men to spread your message is just plain stupid when you don't have to, and downright evil when you then torture those who don't accept it from those con men.

Like I said, complete incessant obedient subservience and worship of himself and his son under threat of eternal torture for any found lacking. That's narcissistic insecurity with absolute power, not love. Edit:part of love is accepting or at least tolerating disagreement, even disagreeable behaviour, and murdering people you find unsavory is not tolerance, sending them to hell is far closer to hate than love.
You don't threaten people into "loving" you out of love. (and worshiping out of fear isn't love)
You don't murder millions because you love them, even when they're being naughty.

I believe in a guy named Jesus, he could walk on water when it freezes, and turn water into wine using his vineyard, but his mom was no virgin and his dad was a human being. Am I good?

Why is 1/2 the video dancing dumbness? It could have been the interview he gave right afterwards where he claimed he shut his eyes after the last hurdle, and saw his mom waiting for him when he opened them and jumped to her....a hilarious explanation imo.

Freedom of religion is independent of civilian armament.
History shows that religious persecution is normal for humanity, and in most cases it's perpetrated by the government. Sometimes to consolidate power (with government tie-ins to the main religion), and sometimes to pander to the grimace of a majority.

Ironically, in this country, freedom of religion only exists due to armed conflict, albeit merely as a side effect of independence from a religiously homogeneous ruling power.



It's true that Catalonians would likely have been shot at if they were armed.
However, likewise, the Spanish government will never grant the Catalans democracy so long as the Catalans are not armed - simply because it doesn't have to.
(*Barring self suicidal/sacrificial behavior on part of the Catalans that eventually [after much suffering] embarrasses the government into compliance - often under risk that 3rd parties will intervene if things continue)

When the government manufactures consent, it will be first in line to claim that people have democratic freedom. When the government fails to manufacture consent, it will crack down with force.

At the end of the day, in government, might makes right. Laws are only words on paper, the government's arms are what make the laws matter.

Likewise, democracy is no more than an idea. The people's force of arms (or threat thereof) is what assert's the people's dominance over the government.



You can say the police/military are stronger and it would never matter, however, the size of an [armed] population is orders of magnitude larger than the size of an army. Factor in the fact that the people need to cooperate with the government in order to support and supply the government's military. No government can withstand armed resistance of the population at large. This is one of the main lessons from The Prince.

Civilian armament is a bulwark against potentially colossal ills (albeit ills that come once every few generations).

Look at NK. The people get TV, radio, cell, from SK. They can look across the river and see massive cities on the Chinese side. They know they have to play along with the charade that their government demands. At the end of the day, without guns, things won't change.

Look at what happened during the Arab Spring. All these unarmed nations turned to external armed groups to fight for them to change their governments. All it accomplished was them becoming serfs to the invited 3rd parties. This is another lesson from The Prince : always take power by your own means, never rely on auxiliaries, because your auxiliaries will become your new rulers.






Below is general pontification. No longer a reply.
------------------------------------------------------------------



Civilian armament does come with periodic tragedies. Those tragedies suck. But they're also much less significant than the risks of disarmament.
(Eg. School shootings, 7-11 robberies, etc -versus- Tamils vs Sri Lankan government, Rohingya vs Burmese government. etc.)

Regarding rifles specifically (all varieties combined), there is no point in arguing magnitudes (Around 400 lives per year - albeit taken in newsworthy large chunks). 'Falling out of bed' kills more people, same is true for 'Slip and fall'. No one fears their bed or a wet floor.

Pistols could go away and not matter much.
They have minimal militia utility, and they represent almost the entirety of firearms used in violent crime. (Albeit used to take lives in a non newsworthy 1 at a time manner)

(In the U.S.) If tragedy was the only way to die (otherwise infinite lifespan), you would live on average 9000 years. Guns, car crashes, drownings, etc. ~All tragedies included. (http://service.prerender.io/http://polstats.com/?_escaped_fragment_=/life#!/life)






A computer learning example I was taught:

Boy walking with his mom&dad down a path.
Lion #1 jumps out, eats his dad.
(Data : Specifically lion #1 eats his father.)
The boy and mom keep walking
Lion #2 jumps out, eats his mother.
(Data : Specifically lion #2 eats his mother)
The boy keeps walking
He comes across Lion #3.

Question : Should he be worried?

If you are going to generalize [the first two] lions and people, then yes, he should be worried.

In reality, lions may be very unlikely to eat people (versus say, a gazelle). But if you generalized from the prior two events, you will think they are dangerous.

(The relevance to computer learning is that : Computers learn racism, too. If you include racial data along with other data in a learning algorithm, that algorithm can and will be able to make decisions based on race. Not because the software cares - but because it can analyze and correlate.)

(Note : This is also why arguing religion is likely futile. If a child is raised being told that everything is as it is because God did it, then that becomes their basis for reality. Telling them that their belief in god is wrong, is like telling the boy in the example that lions are statistically quite safe to people. It challenges what they've learned.)



I mentioned this example, because it illustrates learning and perception. And it segways into my following analogy.



Here's a weird analogy, but it goes like this :

(I'm sure SJW minded people will shit themselves over it, but whatever)

"Gun ownership in today's urban society" is like "Black people in 80's white bred society".

2/3 of the population today has no contact with firearms (mostly urban folk)
They only see them on movies used to shoot people, and on the news used to shoot people.
If you are part of that 2/3, you see guns as murder tools.
If you are part of the remaining 1/3, you see guns like shoes or telephones - absolutely mundane daily items that harm nobody.

In the 80's, if you were in a white bred community, your only understanding of black people would be from movies where they are gangsters and shoot people, and from the nightly news where you heard about some black person who shot people.
If you were part of an 80's white bred community, you saw black people as dangerous likely killers.
If you were part of an 80's black/mixed community, you saw black people as regular people living the same mundane lives as anyone else.

In either case, you can analytically know better. But your gut feelings come from your experience.



Basically, I know guns look bad to 2/3 of the population. That won't change. People's beliefs are what they are.
I also know that the likelihood of being in a shooting is essentially zero.
I also know that history repeats itself, and -just in case- I'd rather live in an armed society than an unarmed society. Even if I don't carry a gun.

-scheherazade

"He tried to convince his mom that its finders keepers but his mom made him return it"


"Mother messaged me telling me she had a good story to tell me and to check my cameras around a certain time."

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Great job.

When I was in high school I had a friend who could play the first half of Van Halen's Eruption. When the girls came over - my job was to ask him to play the song, and then rudely interrupt him right before he got to the part that he didn't know how to play, forcing him to stop.

This guy is a great guitarist. I guess what I'm saying is that the lady in the audience making the request is his mom - and he put her up to it. And maybe she's the only one there. And this is his back yard. At least he knew the whole song.

That kid, wow. *rolls on the ground*, anyone watching me? yep, *rolls on the ground some more*. You could forgive the over-dramatization if he was actually hurt, but he seemed fine at the end when hugging his mom. Weird...

The dude fully complied and the Cops did this man wrong.

I hope he gets him and his mom and much much nicer home after this settlement.

"Lochte sounds like a kid scrambling after his mother caught him in a lie—and that might not be far from the truth. The story of Lochte’s alleged robbery first emerged on Sunday, when his mother, Ileana, told media that her son had been held up at gunpoint." http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/18/ryan-lochte-s-mom-isn-t-helping-with-his-rio-olympics-robbery-story.html

Sounds like when it first came out it was squashed as untrue until his mom contacted media with his story. http://qz.com/761591/a-cautionary-tale-via-ryan-lochte-dont-tell-your-mom-you-were-robbed-when-you-were-really-just-partying/

No one would have known it ever occurred if he didn't tell his mom his bullshit story. She in turn felt the need to take it to the press.

How do you know his mom is open to the air? My mom is in a plastic container waiting for us to scatter her remains in a sentimental location. Even if she was alive she would be one average target amongst 400 million. The WTC was one of a half dozen PRIME targets in the US on 9/11. The Hyperloop, on completion would become THE PRIME target in the US, not just for ISIS or Al Quaeda but for every nutjob who wanted to attract attention to himself. Hell, you'd probaly have rednecks out hunting taking potshots at it like it was a stop sign.

That being said, I'm still in favor of doing the research because even if Hyperloop never materializes, the research will inevitably have positive spinoffs. We should always dream big.