Not evil kids. Evil parents with evil communities.

Brainwashed kids who have been set upon the path of evil.

Can't believe he blamed it on the Deep Fryer and not the kids.

It's not at all bad faith, since it's what he came for and what he did. He crossed state lines armed looking for trouble he might stop using his gun. He went armed to play cop with zero training and illegally carrying a weapon he was too young to have. He might have Intended to only shoot at arsonists, but what he did was randomly shoot into crowds and down the streets, killing two non arsonists, allegedly while blind due to being pepper sprayed.

I can't decipher your good guilty easy innocent hard targets. What?

He has no right to deputize himself, no matter what property crimes he assumed were forthcoming.

Yeah, try to equate property crime to violent murder, it only shows you aren't arguing in good faith yourself.

He was blocks from the parking lot he came, uninvited, to "protect". Was his beat the whole city now?

Big difference between crossing state lines to guard someone else's business and guarding your own home, more bad faith arguments. You can use force to protect your home and family from threats of serious harm, you can't shoot your neighbor for trespassing and cutting some tree branches you didn't want cut.

Do you know who owned the property he murdered the first guy on? Maybe he stands with the crowd and militia boy was trespassing, brandishing a rifle, and eventually murdering someone there before running and gunning his way back home without reporting the shootings, ensuring that property will be torched within a week.
Great job protecting them. For all he knew he was shooting the owner, he wasn't protecting property when he shot.
That is the innocent property owner here, not the owner of the owner of the original parking lot he was guarding, not the kid or his parents, and this gung ho kid's actions ensured their properties destruction and exacerbated the unrest, triggering more property damage. Good job, fucknuts...enjoy big boy prison.

Actually I think the responsibility falls on the people who left the bus there in the first place, not those who are attracted to it. People won't climb a mountain that's not there. Kids won't play with matches if they can't get their hands on them.

I did not write the title -- still not lies.
Kid say kicked out for gender questioning. Teacher indicates kicked out for being disruptive.

Its the kids video - he get to title it.


On big issues like this ( ie debating on school lunch) , if one believes that school policy is wrong , is not acceptable to speak up?

Granted a better forum would be a school board meeting.

Bottom line the teacher is afraid of loosing his job and hence pushes the position of national policy.

I cannot say how much I enjoyed watching this. Kid's a solid drummer and I love how much she was into it.

*quality
*doublepromote

and also *femme (since this is the "hit like a girl" contest)
(does this qualify as kids? it's not FOR kids, but kids might like it?)

Not for kids, downvoting because this sifter continually puts videos in the wrong channels to cause controversy.

This subject is not for kids....odd since that's what her speech was about, how this subject isn't appropriate for children. Almost like the inappropriate channel assignment is intentional, but what kind of dick would do that?

*nochannel
*terrible *news *law *equality

How long before this gets snidely reassigned to the kids channel?
We need to either fix or remove that channel.....or hobble this user.
Kids is FOR kids, not about kids.

Actually, Henson probably would have LOVED it. His whole thing was to get puppets into places that they hadn't been before.

In fact, a pilot of The Muppet Show was originally called "The Muppet Show: Sex and Violence"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Muppet_Show:_Sex_and_Violence

(the sex and violence name was there specifically to indicate that the show was NOT for kids)

Really, he's competent enough to escape from multiple armed kidnappers, several kids and at least one adult who all just left him alone and unrestrained while they all went into another, non adjoining room so he could escape unnoticed, but he can't show police where the property full of racists, guns, and torture devices he escaped on foot from is? And local police don't know the fat ginger racist in a red truck with "I hate black people" tattooed on his forearm by name?
Sounds pretty fishy to me.

Inappropriate channel assignments, so
*nochannel
Maybe *news (likely fake news) *equality and *controversy, but certainly not for kids and not related to the military war on terror. Also not a lynching.

Try not having kids then. Cutting your per capita consumption in half does less than nothing when you also double the number of consumers. The worst thing most people can do to nature is breed.

No, making the argument that one is not as bad as the other isn't the same as making excuses. It's exactly what he said, they're both unacceptable, and he's trying to define the spectrum.

I have a touch more time, so let me go back to your first example.
Yes, if some dude broke my leg, yes I would appreciate that they didn't murder me.

Obviously, I don't want either thing to happen, but justice is about assigning degrees of a spectrum to an infinite number of variables of what is decidedly wrong. Please admit, it's at least imprecise to have a one-size-fits-all justice system.

I won't repeat the examples already given that should have laid bare the problems equating what should be corrected gingerly vs using a heavy hand, but I want to reiterate that they ring true for me.

NSFW warning:

I've had bad dates where I've been made to feel awkward. Believe it or not, I've been in a sexual encounter where I've been forced to hmmm... finish... inside a girl when I didn't want to. We had been together a short time and she was ENAMORED with me, and I felt 'meh' about her. (don't put your dick in crazy)

Long story short, I'm strict about using birth control so I'm not making kids when I don't want to. Although, in the heat of the moment, I'm not above a tried and true pulling out for lack of a better option. This had been the plan going into the sexual encounter, but when I let out a warning about a climax, instead of helping me push her off, she pushed her hands against my shoulders and clamped her thighs onto me. I objected "wait!!! no!!!" but not being a fucking Buddhist monk with complete control over every muscle in my body, well, you can imagine where it went from there.


Shortly thereafter, she started asking me what I thought about this or that baby name and it became clearer what she was really after. (yes really)

I waited for confirmation that she wasn't pregnant and we broke up immediately after, because of that and a general disinterest that I had towards her as a person.

That was when I was ehh? 19? idk, somewhere around there. More than 10 years ago at least.

But I digress, did what she did feel a little 'rape-y' to me? I said no, It was something we talked about beforehand, setting up parameters, etc. but it ended up just being a bad experience. Because of that bad experience I never really talked to her again. She does some kind of work in 3d printing now last I checked.

I don't think it's crazy to not want her to lose her job, and not want to file criminal charges against her, --- and this is key --- because even though something happened that was non consensual, I don't consider what happened rape, and I would NEVER equate what happened to me to what happened to all of Weinstein's victims because they fall on opposite ends of the spectrum.

Neither one was okay, and one is worse than the other.

In Melbourne, they use this sign/poster, and they're not fucking kidding.

It's tragic when a person gets hit by a tram, but if you drive in front of one, you're a fucking moron.

Educated younger people want to be where the action is, meaning places where they can advance quickly in a career they are passionate about while having a high take-home pay. They also want what their parent's generation had, which was often a home in the suburbs or at least a condo or townhouse they owned outright, to comfortably start a family.

The two things are mostly incompatible, because the work they are passionate about is typically around the cities and their parent's generation is still occupying any and all affordable dwellings in the area, including the surrounding suburbs. This wouldn't be a problem except property owners feel an incentive to actively prevent new developments which might lower their home price plus make the area more crowded/disrupted. This is partly a result of the sprawl in areas like Silicon Valley reaching its physical boundaries, so the price of land just keeps increasing to these crazy numbers like '$2mil median home sale in 2016'.

These young people can afford to rent in these areas, so they see how comfortable it is, but don't see how they could own there without a windfall of money. So they are kind of stuck hoping to make it big, but in reality just putting off either buying property where they can't follow the career they want or choosing to follow their career but watching their rent increase. This isn't a new problem, its just become more exaggerated in the last decade, and is pushing a lot of younger people to not have kids and to carry a lot of anxiety about their place in the world.

There are a lot of potential ways forward, like massively increasing government investment in transportation infrastructure to move people more efficiently by bus/train/etc., and massively scaling up internet speeds to make telecommuting more commonplace.

Anyhow, its really just younger people wanting what their parent's had, struggling really hard towards it, settling for much less, and complaining a bit to each other about it. Its just a newer problem for Americans (and places like Australia as well), where there very recently was all this space, and now its all old people's investment properties, available for rent at 400% what their mortgage is.