search results matching tag: reckless

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (113)     Sift Talk (7)     Blogs (10)     Comments (444)   

A Scary Time

scheherazade says...

What sort of evidence?

- Accusation/testimonial evidence?

- Or Physical evidence that is an invariant indicator of rape, that you can hold, see, measure, etc?



Anyone can accuse. That's effortless. Takes barely more energy than breathing.

(It's also effortless for a group of sour girls to gang up on a dude that upset them. Because "f that guy'. (That attitude isn't even rare.))



Physical evidence? People are convicted day in and day out of all sorts of things without physical evidence.

(Court is after all a popularity contest.)




My scary moment was when a cop detained me and told me he was going to charge me with : reckless driving, driving without a seat belt, and with threatening his life.

Why? Because I pulled up to a road block and asked him if I could drive past his road block to go home (which was a short way past the road block)... and he was having some emotional stability/triggering issues at the time, and he instantly turned red and went full on tirade mode.

Fortunately for me, after detaining me a few hours, some switch flipped in his head again and he just went to his car, got in, and drove off. Surreal.

So I asked myself :
If I had been charged, what would be the difference in court, vis-a-vis evidence, between it being a lie, and it being the truth?
Answer : No difference.

All he threatened me with was provable only by his word, and no evidence was required. I likely would have gone to jail, and had my life turned upside down... all on some person's grimace.

My view on evidence changed that day.
I will _NEVER_ convict anyone of anything, without physical tangible evidence that I can hold in my hand and see with my eyes, or at least run forensic tests on.
Testimony doesn't mean _shit_. It's absolutely, patently _worthless_.

(I also now run a dash cam everywhere I drive to protect myself from false accusations)




Basically, unless you have physical proof, I don't care.
Whatever you have to say, prove it.
No proof, no cares.

That goes for all accusations of anything ever. Across the board. Absolute.

It's the standard I want people to have for me, and it's the standard I have for others.

-scheherazade





(Aside, unrelated : I know a dude that was raped by a girl (he was nearly paralyzed drunk at his own house party). Wasn't even a secret. People at the party knew it happened. Nobody cared. When he complained, all anyone said was "Oh whatever. Shut up get over it". It wasn't even a question of 'did it happen?', it was a matter of "so what?".)

ChaosEngine said:

[...]
Finally, where is the abandoning of proof and evidence? Show me someone who has been convicted of sexual assault without any evidence. There's a big difference between accepting an allegation is worth looking into and convicting that person.

If a woman (or a man) comes forward with a claim of sexual assault, they are entitled to be taken seriously. That doesn't mean their alleged assailant is guilty though.
[...]

State Police Use Helicopter To Disperse Tailgaters

Ashenkase says...

Reckless for everyone involved. If some of the stuff blown up got sucked into the blades or an air intake there would have been dozens dead. I hope this guy gets his license suspended barring an investigation.

simonm (Member Profile)

Verdict Read: Roy Oliver Guilty Of Murder

newtboy says...

Yes, and....
U.S. District Judge David Norton, in issuing the sentence, said Slager shot Scott with "malice and recklessness" and then gave false testimony to investigators. Norton ruled that Slager, 36, was guilty of second-degree murder and obstruction of justice, and he also sentenced Slager to two years of supervision after his release.

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/walter-scott-shooting/walter-scott-shooting-michael-slager-ex-officer-sentenced-20-years-n825006

C-note said:

Michael Slager pleaded guilty to federal charges of civil rights violations.

Unarmed child shot in the back while running from police

newtboy says...

Easy to say when you're white, adult, and you weren't just shot at by strangers. Keep in mind this was a kid who had just been shot at, so probably not the world's best decision maker at that moment.....
Choice 1) Submit yourself to the whims of what you believe are racist cops more interested in convicting black kids than the truth that already sound convinced you're a murderer they want to kill, knowing just the accusation will ruin if not end your life or 2) attempt to escape with your hands visible so they know you aren't threatening.

That cop's boss disagrees with you and said he was reckless and unsafe to a criminal extent and didn't follow procedure, as did the DA. You'll excuse me if I put more stock in their professional opinions than yours.
That said, white cop/black kid, so he probably won't be convicted, but be clear that's not the same as being cleared of wrongdoing. There's zero question he did wrong, he shot the wrong unarmed kid in the back 3 times. If it were your kid I doubt you would make excuses for the ex-officer or be so quick to pay him on the back for executing them.

bobknight33 said:

Sorry, no sympathy.
Don't act guilty by running away.
The cop was doing his job correctly and will be cleared of any wrong doing.

Mordhaus (Member Profile)

The Fast and The Furious...Not

SFOGuy says...

The reckless and the stupid? I mean really; who jumps from a moving vehicle on a highway onto the back to a trailer? good grief.
lol

Payback said:

How about the "Somewhat Quick and the Ill-Tempered"?

Bernie Sanders shows support for aims of Jeremy Corbyn

dannym3141 says...

There are some that suggest May or the tories in general are trying to lose the election so that Labour WILL take the backlash. Ultimately no way to know how that will go, but right now there is severe backlash towards the tories and the narrative is swiftly changing towards Labour. I see an election win as the start of a very, very long conversation. Activists will have to continue the fight, press standards will have to be changed either through public pressure or through legislature. And in Britain that might happen because the press here are the most distrusted in europe (52% disapproval, or 52% considered biased/corrupt, or something).

I said in the past that the UK was ready to change. Essentially, the narrative was there to be taken right back, but I didn't know if Corbyn's team had the skill to do it. I have to say that I am blown away by Labour's campaign, it has been almost flawless. I say that because i think the narrative is there to be taken on Brexit. The tories called the referendum to hold onto power. They arrogantly called the general election to consolidate power, with Brexit talks imminent, only to whine about being too busy to do interviews because they're thinking about Brexit! They have then made a catastrophic hash of their campaign, u-turned 5 or 6 times, contradicted themselves, and generally shown themselves to be weak, without answers, and bullies. In 10 years time, who knows what we will think? But in the short term at least, this can be framed as a "they fucked it up, but we'll take over in a crisis and try to fix it."

At the end of the day, a Corbyn government has always been so out of the question that i don't know what to expect if that were to happen. Is another referendum on leaving out of the question?

At the very least, for now, i would say Brits prefer the idea of Labour sorting out Brexit than the Tories, and the average attitude towards Brexit in the country is rather one of resigned acceptance - we know it's bad, but we did it, so now we better get on with it. But we're very suspicious, and don't want to get shafted by irresponsible or reckless politicians. True for the left and right, but obviously for different reasons.

radx said:

As much as I'd love to see Corbyn's Labour win the election, it depresses me to think how the nightmare that is Brexit would then have to be "managed" by them. In the end, the inevitable disaster might very well be laid at Labour's feet by the press, thereby discrediting Corbyn's policies for years to come.

Or does anyone see any way Brexit could be done that does not end in disaster? From where I'm standing, it's a five-year process in the best of times, yet neither are these the best of times, nor have the Tories done anything of substance in the time since the referendum. In fact, they don't even seem to be aware of what enormous undertaking these kinds of negotations are. Judging by the "leaks" from Juncker's meeting with May, she seemed completely unprepared, even delusional and misinformed about the process.

Range Rover imitates Rockford and fails

Drone Footage Of Syrian Base After Recent Tomahawk Strike

cosmovitelli says...

Some people seem to think this was a false flag operation (the supposed chemical attack and the reasoning behind the US response)
Apparently its a very complicated sunni -shia - iran - saudi- yemen situation about an oil pipeline that will cut russia out of the loop. They also say Trump is more concerned about drawing attention away from his Russian treason and recklessly provoking the russians for his own domestic survival. A total all round shit show in other words.

How Donald Trump Tweets

Doug Stanhope: High on Shrooms AGAIN

shagen454 says...

yeah, it honestly seems like his depression bubbled to the surface in this interview. Mom has emphysema, lonely and reckless with substances. Austin might be a good move for him.

AeroMechanical said:

Xanax ground up in hard liquor. Quantities determined while tripping.

That's safe.

09 11 2016 Hillary Clinton collapses / faints, literally dr

bobknight33 says...

Clinton story is that she has Pneumonia.

If She had pneumonia it would be reckless to standing there spewing germs over everyone.

Then when she comes out of her daughters place and a "staged" little girl comes up to her, if she did have pneumonia she should have not let the little girl get near her.

She does not have pneumonia. It just her PR machine with PR BS.

Hillary Clinton appears to faint stumble during 911 Memorial

bobknight33 says...

Pneumonia my but.

If She had pneumonia it would be reckless to standing there spewing germs over everyone.

Then when she comes out of her daughters place and a "staged" little girl comes up to her, if she die have pneumonia she should have not let the little girl get near her.

She does not have pneumonia. It just her PR machine with PR BS.

RFlagg said:

Appears she may have pneumonia and was there anyhow
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/11/politics/hillary-clinton-health/index.html

Just another day in Russia

Babymech says...

Well... more like 1 van purposely smashing into a car, another car driving recklessly to get out of the way of the van as it repositions, and then that same van driving into the path of an oncoming bus. I wouldn't say it's 3 accidents when it seems to be the same van doing all of it - possibly a getaway car, or just a really high driver.

MilkmanDan said:

Jesus. I think driving in Thailand is crazy, but I've never seen 3 (did I miss any?!) accidents in the span of 30 seconds.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon