I live in Chicago, and as a result, have a pretty good idea where those fireworks are coming from in relation to Wrigley Field, and I can only think, "Wow. It's November 2, and you have illegal fireworks laying around, presumably left over from the 4th of July when you got too drunk to finish setting them off."

Or there's the very real possibility that they had a strategic reserve of fireworks on the off chance that the Cubs ever won the World Series, which, if true, is more astonishing that any went off.

After seeing Batman VR, I decided that after years of slumber, it was time to make a return!

Since I've been back, I've discovered a few things have changed during my absence. Such as how my "Dead" sprees can be seen in the "newest comments" and how the "embed code" replace had gone somewhere that I could only guess is reserved for the "Deadpool."

That said though, I do want to try my luck again here on videosift and see if I can catch up on old times. So fair forewarning to anyone ranked 1-69 (I'm shocked I'm at Rank 70 after all this time), if I start to get bored one of these days, you might get a couple of emails from Siftbot saying how a good chunk of your videos had died.

I like to think that I "Inspired" the "Grim Reaper" badge. But yeah... It is time to see if I can crack Top 50 and get to a rating over 1000!

LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL!

...This space reserved for wild crack-pot conspiracy theory...

Signed and signed.

Did you sign th
is one?

Republicans must be incredibly desperate to call a coughing fit a "breakdown".
What a terrifying world it must be for them, first the unbearable disgrace of having a black president....twice....now the near certain loss of all control over the government. No wonder they grasp at straws like this.
Reserving my downvote so others can see the sad state of the republican position.

Natives on reservations can kill you and only deal with tribal prosecution. In some instances it's the right thing to do.
Shoot those motherfuckers then scalp them all.

* ban1.0....

*related= http://videosift.com/video/This-is-something-International-Reserve-System-IRS
* ban4.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t86BI8O8ETA

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Niagara-Cemetery
* ban3.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWtCt1YmkA4

*related= http://videosift.com/video/How-to-make-money-from-home-work-from
* ban 2.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTn-HUIZlQ

* ban2.0....

*related= http://videosift.com/video/This-is-something-International-Reserve-System-IRS
* ban4.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t86BI8O8ETA

*related= http://videosift.com/video/Niagara-Cemetery
* ban3.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWtCt1YmkA4


*related= http://videosift.com/video/ABC-123-Dental-Fort-Worth-Office
* ban1.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iYvmwQlOwM

* ban3.0....

*related= http://videosift.com/video/This-is-something-International-Reserve-System-IRS
* ban4.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t86BI8O8ETA

*related= http://videosift.com/video/How-to-make-money-from-home-work-from
* ban 2.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhTn-HUIZlQ

*related= http://videosift.com/video/ABC-123-Dental-Fort-Worth-Office
* ban1.0
Andrew rampock
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iYvmwQlOwM

How would you fake it? It's possible the youtube poster misrepresented the timing of the video it looks like it's the preamble to Hillary's acceptance, not her actual corination, but it's clear there is a schism in the Democratic party.

"DEMOCRATS CHANGE SIGNS FROM “HILLARY” TO “LIAR” DURING DNC"
http://www.infowars.com/democrats-change-signs-from-hillary-to-liar-during-dnc/

I knew a guy that sky-dived, who said the rule in most emergencies was "One, two, fuck you"; you have 2 tries to fix something on your main and then you cut away and pull your reserve.

Hmm. It’s an interesting story – it doesn’t seem that it’s 100% the typical patent troll mold, though it’s obviously still a shitty tale of bullshit patent litigation tactics. It looks like Pappas had his original idea and filed for a patent in 2000, basically trying to create a way to monetize the ad hoc markets that pop up whenever people are in line or reserving places for entertainment (probably based on his own restaurant experience). He filed a single, very broad, multiregion patent on this, and launched a company and online platform around it in 2008 (OptionIt) to provide an online service for trading ticket reservations / places in line. Braxton had a similar but more clearly defined idea in 2011, and filed his own patent.

Like I said – I don’t like this idea, I wish it hadn’t been granted patent protection, and I’m happy if it never reaches the market. However, for all that, I think Pappas original idea was a bit more inventive. Back in 2000 we didn’t have an app economy, and we hadn’t gotten used to these kinds of ad hoc, internet-facilitated temporary market places. When Braxton came up with it, it was pretty dull.

Either way, once Pappas started his business, I guess he instructed his law firm to handle litigation as aggressively as possible, which is fairly standard practice, and which is the unfortunate behavior described in the video. After losing the original suit and then losing the Rule 11 motion, they argued like aggressive assholes in mediation, and got Braxton to back down. I think their threat was fairly hollow – he says that they threatened him with their ‘patent portfolio,’ but this is the only patent family I can find for OptionIt / Smart Option.

I’m not sure I would call this a textbook case of patent trolling – usually patent trolls file or acquire patents for the sole purpose of extorting legitimate businesses, but here it looks like Pappas was actually trying to make a go of this (shitty) app idea, but used intimidation to try to protect that idea. It’s one shitty business trying to intimidate another upstart shitty business, and the courts ruling against the first party. On the whole we all lose – OptionIt wins the mediation through shitty intimidation, and Braxton’s shitty patent gets added to Spangenberg’s portfolio of shitty troll assets to keep the cycle going.

Lawrence Wilkerson's dismissive comments about self defense are very disrespectful to people who have had to resort to self defense. He wouldn't say things like that had he been unfortunate enough to have had such a personal experience. (As one parent of a Fla victim said - his child would have given anything for a firearm at the time of the event.)

Re. 2nd amendment, yes, it's not for pure self defense. The reasoning is provided within the text. The government is denied legal powers over gun ownership ('shall not be infringed') in order to preserve the ability of the people to form a civilian paramilitary intended to face [presumably invading] foreign militaries in combat ('militia').

It's important to remember that the U.S. is a republic - so the citizens are literally the state (not in abstract, but actually so). As such, there is very little distinction between self defense and state defense - given that self and state are one.

Personally, I believe any preventative law is a moral non-starter. Conceptually they rely on doling out punishment via rights-denial to all people, because some subset might do harm. Punishment should be reserved for those that trespass on others - violating their domain (body/posessions/etc). Punishment should not be preemptive, simply to satiate the fears/imaginations of persons not affected by those punished. Simply, there should be no laws against private activities among consenting individuals. Folks don't have to like what other folks do, and they don't have to be liked either. It's enough to just leave one another alone in peace.

Re. Fla, the guilty party is dead. People should not abuse government to commit 3rd party trespass onto innocent disliked demographics (gun owners) just to lash out. Going after groups of people out of fear or dislike is unjustified.







---------------------------------------------------




As an aside, the focus on "assault rifles" makes gun control advocates appear not sincere, and rather knee-jerk/emotional. Practically all gun killings utilize pistols.

There are only around 400 or so total rifle deaths per year (for all kinds of rifles combined) - which is almost as many as the people who die each year by falling out of bed (ever considered a bed to be deadly? With 300 million people, even low likelihood events must still happen reasonably often. It's important to keep in mind the likelihood, and not simply the totals.).

Around 10'000 people die each day out of all causes. Realistically, rifles of all sorts, especially assault rifles, are not consequential enough to merit special attention - given the vast ocean of far more deadly things to worry about.

If they were calling for a ban+confiscation of all pistols, with a search of every home and facility in the U.S., then I'd consider the advocates to be at least making sense regarding the objective of reducing gun related death.

Also, since sidearms have less utility in a military application, a pistol ban is less anti-2nd-amendment than an assault rifle ban.







As a technical point, ar15s are not actually assault rifles - they just look like one (m4/m16).
Assault rifles are named after the German Sturm Gewehr (storm rifle). It's a rifle that splits the difference between a sub-machinegun (automatic+pistol ammo) and a battle rifle (uses normal rifle/hunting ammo).

- SMG is easy to control in automatic, but has limited damage. (historical example : ppsh-41)

- Battle rifles do lots of damage, but are hard to control (lots of recoil, using full power hunting ammo). (historical example : AVT-40)

- An 'assault rifle' uses something called an 'intermediate cartridge'. It's a shrunken down, weaker version of hunting ammo. A non-high-power rifle round, that keeps recoil in check when shooting automatic. It's stronger than a pistol, but weaker than a normal rifle. But that weakness makes it controllable in automatic fire. (historical example : StG-44)

- The ar15 has no automatic fire. This defeats the purpose of using weak ammo (automatic controlability). So in effect, it's just a weak normal rifle. (The M4/M16 have automatic, so they can make use of the weak ammo to manage recoil - and they happen to look the same).

Practically speaking, a semi-auto hunting rifle is more lethal. A Remington 7400 with box mag is a world deadlier than an ar15. An M1A looks like a hunting rifle, and is likewise deadlier than an ar15. Neither are viewed as evil or dangerous.

You can also get hunting rifles that shoot intermediate cartridges (eg. Ruger Mini14). The lethality is identical to an ar15, but because it doesn't look black and scary, no one complains.

In practice, what makes the ar15 scary is its appearance. The pistol grip, the adjustable stock, the muzzle device, the black color, all are visual identifiers, and those visuals have become politically more important than what it actually does.

You can see the lack of firearms awareness in the proposed laws - proposed bans focus on those visual features. No pistol grips, no adjustable stocks, etc. Basically a listing of ancillary features that evoke scary appearance, and nothing to do with the core capabilities of a firearm.

What has made the ar15 the most popular rifle in the country, is that it has very good ergonomics, and is very friendly to new shooters. The low recoil doesn't scare new shooters away, and the great customizability makes it like a gun version of a tuner-car.

I think its massive success, popularity, and widespread adoption, have made it the most likely candidate to be used in a shooting. It's cursed to be on-hand whenever events like Fla happen.

-scheherazade

Mala Mala Private Game Reserve - aka Tiny Penis Gardens.