If only it were that simple. Did Assange wake up to all these leaked documents and go "You know what, I'm going to release all these documents belonging to the world's biggest superpower and it will be fine because I'm not a US citizen and therefore they'll just forget about it"?

People get extradited all the time, and not always to their birth countries. The US is currently trying to extradite a UK hacker from the UK. That's right, the UK is debating extraditing one of their own. It happens when you break laws that have international ramifications.

But even if you put all the law/jurisdiction mess aside. It doesn't help that I hugely dislike Assange. He's an egotistical, reckless bastard out to promote his own name. Secondly, I hate The Young Turks. Cenk says Assange is being extradited for "actually doing journalism". Oh fuck off Cenk, releasing a bunch of documents in their raw format, is NOT journalism. Anybody could do that.

>> ^dag:

Just because the documents were classified by the US government - why is it binding on someone who is not a citizen of the US?
If Iran marks their nuclear enrichment plans as top secret - and they wind up on Wikileaks - do you also think Assange should be extradited to Iran to stand trial?

>> ^Hybrid:
I have no issue with seeing Mr. Assange being extradited to the US via Sweden. He made a conscious choice to leak knowingly classified information, now it's time to face the music.

I always use my bicycle on the sidewalk or separate bicycle roads, my average speed is 16 km/h (10 mph), I always look for immediate and potential dangers and slow down near kids and animals as well as turn down the volume on my music when I need to dedicate more attention, I never cross a road unless I have eye contact with the approaching driver, and I have never in my 30+ year life been close to landing with any parts of my body above my knee (since all the crashes I have ever had have been low-speed while trying to break on gravel). (Also my mileage on bicycle since April when the snow disappeared is ~900km.)

Maybe this will come back to haunt me one day, but I'm so surprised that people need bicycle helmets for most of the slow speed bycycling they do when what they need is actually a brain, since everyone I know that has been involved in serious bicycle crashes have been stupid, reckless or just crazy.
Of course if you have to use the roads and live in France, then please do wear one..

Pay attention to the car thats coming instead of cutting. Tap the break a bit instead of going full speed down a hill. Slow down (and show some respect) for your fellow humans and animals.
Avoiding an accident alltogether is always better than being in one with a crappy helmet.

I use a helmet when I go snowboarding and mountain biking though, but it's not a bicycle helmet.

You also didnt have a megaphone blasting at you requesting you leave that area. Safe to say there was no need to immediately disperse, and had they all been hanging around watching someone get stabbed then you should have left and called the cops.

>> ^L0cky:

I went into town one evening a few weeks ago and saw a big crowd of people. I decided to walk up and see what was going on. Turned out the Olympic torch was passing through and they were putting on a show of it; and man it was pretty slick.
But now that I've read you're post I realise how stupid I was. I could have been associating myself with all kinds of horrible crimes; maybe even murder or drink driving! And as I wasn't ACTIVELY disassociating myself from the activities before me I was justifiably laying myself down to the mercy of any reckless police officer that may be in the vicinity. If one of them shot me, I would have felt foolish and would have only myself to blame. Thanks for the info!
Or rather, without the smart ass stuff, you're post has a major flaw. You failed to specify any crime that this naive, biased, hothead youth of America was supposed to be disassociating himself from.
>> ^legacy0100:
Know your civic duties before claiming you are being violated of your rights. Naive, biased, hotheaded youth of America.

I went into town one evening a few weeks ago and saw a big crowd of people. I decided to walk up and see what was going on. Turned out the Olympic torch was passing through and they were putting on a show of it; and man it was pretty slick.

But now that I've read you're post I realise how stupid I was. I could have been associating myself with all kinds of horrible crimes; maybe even murder or drink driving! And as I wasn't ACTIVELY disassociating myself from the activities before me I was justifiably laying myself down to the mercy of any reckless police officer that may be in the vicinity. If one of them shot me, I would have felt foolish and would have only myself to blame. Thanks for the info!

Or rather, without the smart ass stuff, you're post has a major flaw. You failed to specify any crime that this naive, biased, hothead youth of America was supposed to be disassociating himself from.

>> ^legacy0100:
Know your civic duties before claiming you are being violated of your rights. Naive, biased, hotheaded youth of America.

Car accidents don't happen any more often and drivers aren't more reckless or stupid in Russia.

They just happen to have more dashcams over there.

I like the guy who just sticks a gun out of his window. Sometimes I think America is backwards, but damn Russia is just like it.

Yeah I'm starting to think Russia would've beaten us...I mean these are some tough reckless mother fuckers.

Here's the law, my highlights added:

Ohio Revised Code Title [29] XXIX CRIMES - PROCEDURE Chapter 2917: OFFENSES AGAINST THE PUBLIC PEACE
2917.11 Disorderly conduct.
(A) No person shall recklessly cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to another by doing any of the following:

(5) Creating a condition that is physically offensive to persons or that presents a risk of physical harm to persons or property, by any act that serves no lawful and reasonable purpose of the offender.

(E)(1) Whoever violates this section is guilty of disorderly conduct.
[http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2917.11]

So, were they (A) causing inconvenience, annoyance or alarm? I think annoyance/alarm is fair.

Was it (5) physically offensive? Certainly -- notice the test isn't whether the person is urinating or not, but whether someone is physically offended by it. Seeing someone peeing -- whether they happen to be actors or not -- is physically offensive.

Did the act (5) serve a lawful and reasonable purpose to the offender? Well, he was making a TV bit by being physically offensive and annoying/alarming people, which is useful because it's his job. Does that count as "serving a purpose"? Going 'round in circles here.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^EvilDeathBee:
No girly padding and helmets used here

I'm tired of hearing this argument. For anyone who's ever played Football you'd know it's not for pussies. Also there's enough medical evidence to show that hits in football can seriously damage a brain and destroy someones life. So not exactly pussies...just stupid and reckless.


Now now, no need to get so butthurt cause your sport is boring.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

No girly padding and helmets used here


I'm tired of hearing this argument. For anyone who's ever played Football you'd know it's not for pussies. Also there's enough medical evidence to show that hits in football can seriously damage a brain and destroy someones life. So not exactly pussies...just stupid and reckless.

>> ^Mammaltron:

Don't worry everyone, the chief has said there will be a Review which will certainly get to the bottom of the incident and ensure the officers responsible are reprimanded, and possibly charged with reckless endangerment.
After all the maniac had to be stopped. What if he'd hit someone?


And also the civilians will get free counselling, so everybody wins.

Don't worry everyone, the chief has said there will be a Review which will certainly get to the bottom of the incident and ensure the officers responsible are reprimanded, and possibly charged with reckless endangerment.

After all the maniac had to be stopped. What if he'd hit someone?

Fuzzy fucking maths? Its only the laws of physics honey. I don't wish to disrespect others personal experience, but I knew a guy who had lots of personal experience of not having accidents, despite his speed and somewhat reckless driving...until he had an accident. The good news is he won't be having anymore accidents. The bad news is he won't be having anymore anything.

There is a reason you are advised to keep a good distance between you and the vehicle in front, its not just some random theorycrafting. If you rly don't trust the numbers then I suggest you hop on your bike, find a truck to coast behind and wait. Remember to video it and link me to the result. Oh, and try not to die, I don't think videosift will let me post snuff.

I hear what you're saying, that death porn shouldn't be what the sift is all about. One video that happens to include someone getting killed doesn't change the Sift into death porn. Just like there's at least one full-on uncensored XXX porn clip that the community has accepted because it was also a good parody, or had a hilarious story or something. I can't remember what the reasoning was.

Death porn is what I think the Sift should avoid. This is not that. Also, I almost never go to Sift Talk, so I wouldn't know what happens there.
In reply to this comment by SDGundamX:
I considered everything you said there and still found this video lacking of being Sift-worthy, which is why I downvoted. Everything you mentioned is worthy of discussion... in the Sift Talk section with a link to the video.

Like I said, IMO videos of graphic killings aren't what we should be promoting on the Sift since this is supposed to be a friendly contest to find the best videos on the net. There are plenty of other sites to look at for sensationalist videos.

In reply to this comment by messenger:
Exactly. When I wrote, "I'm sure this won't be controversial," I meant I thought people would debate whether the shooter did the right thing in taking him out, or whether she endangered the victom too much. There's tons of content here. This isn't a video of a murder or a suicide. Take the death out and this is still a worthy video.>> ^Confucius:

Oh wow. Open your mind please. Can't believe nobody has mentioned anything about the goldmine that the rest of this video is. I mean...drugged coke bottles...SHE SHOT HIM FOUR TIMES (he went down after the first!)....reckless tactics which are somehow ok....stressing the crap out of the hostage-taker....and more importantly the fact that this 'snuff' film made it onto Chinese news with descriptors like Hero...epic...awesome. Can you imagine this in the US or UK?
You cant let your mind shut down because of the possibility that its a snuff film when there is so much value in this video.
reinforced note to self: Don't ef with the police in China.