@ messenger-The solution lies in a combination of radical reform of policy, and that can only happen if people stop following the programming of the people who pay for elections firstly. Then, you educate the hell out of people at a grass-roots level of just how deep the rabbit hole goes i.e., the insidious cabal of those who would profit from incarcerating more and more people to prop-up their money-making scam of larger and stronger law enforcement infrastructure, the inhumane prison industry which is billions of dollars annually. Profiteers who breed future criminals in prisons, and ghettos. It takes people actually giving a fuck about their society instead of thinking that they are safe ans secure with more police.

YOU ARE NOT

Police are made-up of dangerous, self-loathing and damaged individuals who are recruited for the sole purpose of building the infrastructure I described with protecting and serving very, very low on their not-so-hidden agenda.

The power-keepers and their fanatical putsch should be glaringly obvious to anyone with a TV, the internet, and an I.Q. above 100.

"They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."-Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanac.

Heed the words of a brilliant statesman and thinker, and of similar, modern contemporaries.

I don't have much hope for it, I have expatriation written all over my forehead in big red letters. Hardly a place to go anymore, the entire world is jumping on board to the 'occupy everything with police and military' route.

Cops are criminals, plain and simple. Continue to believe to the contrary and watch how fast the shit gets non-linear.

I would really love you to have persuaded me that I was wrong, but I really think the two words are just too closely related.

I did come across the wonderful descriptive phrase "brain-dribble" from Henry Duff Traill, but not in a sense that helps either of us.

I also came across a Henry Lawson poem, One Hundred and Three, from 1908, which includes this passage:

They double-lock at four o'clock and the warders leave their keys,
And the Governor strolls with a friend at eve through his stone conservatories;
Their window slits are like idiot mouths with square stone chins adrop,
And the weather-stains for the dribble, and the dead flat foreheads atop.

They've got strikingly similar features-ocular orientation, relative distance form nose to eyes and mouth-forehead and hairline not so much...

She can get a date with the
guy with the nose growing on his forehead

*edit-Oh, there he is-same doctor??

FOREhead

Saw this the other day and thought he should just have'em grow another symmetrical one on the other side and rock that pair 'o forehead schnozes!

So really the issue is people are doing something illegal and getting busted for it. The government is aware that people will routinely break said law and are profiting off it.

So the real issue is that the government is acting as a for-profit organization, right? That still doesn't negate that people are breaking the law and getting busted for it. If the drivers followed the speed limit, then the government couldn't profit off them, now could they? *smacks forehead*

See, with red light cameras there's a legitimate argument to be made. If a driver is following the speed limit, and break safely, there is a set time the yellow light should progress in order to insure compliance and safety. So for instance, if a vehicle traveling at 30MPH takes 10 seconds to come to a slow, controlled stop, the yellow should last for 12 seconds to ensure the drivers a reasonable time to notice the light change and react. (Normal human reaction time is between .3 to 2 seconds.)

So if the government sets the yellow to only 5 seconds, this creates an unsafe and unreasonable margin. And then, if the safest and more sane thing to do is "run the red" and are subsequently ticketed, then that's entrapment. That is wrong, and is something someone can complain about.

Complaining that you got caught speeding, well, boohoo for you. Don't speed. No one is forcing you to speed. So it's your own damn fault, no matter if the government is profiting off it or what video is posted.

If what you're really complaining about is that the actual design of the road triggers a natural response to travel at a "perceived safe speed" (which is a real thing) and the limit is set to a lower than needed limit, then that's something you can complain about. Still doesn't mean speeding isn't illegal.

Speed traps don't work in general. All they trigger is a momentary change in behavior and once the negative force is removed, the behavior continues. But because of the quota systems placed by "hard on crime" Republicans, real change isn't going to happen. Instead what you're seeing is a systematic failure of a rewards and punishment system that has long been proven to be ineffective and counter-productive.

Instead, if they really want to slow speeds, they should redesign the road and perhaps do a road diet, re-stripe the lanes, use bricks or plant trees (which is illegal by DOT standards btw - they hurt cars if they crash, but people don't, so it's better to hit people than trees - no joke, literally their logic.)

Or, if you're worried the police force is resorting to the quota and a misguided broken windows policy, then that's something to address. You're lack of ability to lay off the gas pedal is not a "liberties" issue or the "man putting you down."

The focus is totally misguided and the video is proof.

Governments are profiting from unnecessary ticketing of speeders? I must have missed that somewhere. Oh wait there's a whole video about it at the top of the page!! *smacks forehead*

What cracks me up about these reboots is the truly strange reaction they elicit. Reactions such as, "Don't ruin RoboCop!" and "Leave my childhood alone!" and the like.

So I always enjoy pointing out that, "Did you know when they reboot a franchise, they actually DON'T touch a single frame of the original film? Not even a little? It's true! I done looked it up." (George Lucas excepted, of course).

It's as though people think the filmmakers are going to go house to house, confiscating people's DVDs and replacing them with the rebooted version. <forehead slap>

A reboot of a film will only "ruin" the original if you let it.

In other words, derp.

...but the operative is giggling too much to hang up!
Yeah, this guy needs to get a forehead tattoo to remind him not to drive anymore...and maybe one of those implanted port vascular access points on his body to make it easy for, "Mo-ah beeeyah!"

Every time I chime-in on this retarded phenomena (another in a long-line of developmental disabilities engaged in by modern-day peeps) the cringe releases another gush of acids into my already damaged sphincters-More and more idiots on the road who can't drive anyway with worthless device #836 in their hands letting their robot friends know whats in their heads instead of concentrating on the 3-ton beast they indenture themselves to be able to play moron roulette with.

On of the many reasons I stay pissed-off. Recently though, I must say that I have found a way to diminish the frequency of road-raging incidents. I keep a few cans of silly string from the dollar store in the glove box and instead of shouting at people, I engage them at a stop with an attention-grabbing insult, and quickly empty the can (into their face if I can) on and into their vehicle.

Not adverse to the occasional brake-check, the 1-minute-horn-loop, or bumper-tap, to wrest the head from a fellow-motorist's ass as well. Herding and sheep-dogging works wonders for cooling the cell-towers in the vicinity of my vehicle as well, oh there's all kinds of wonderful things to pay attention to whilst sharing the motorways with choggie.

Herzog has his appeal to idiots, I have mine.
Please make a law in my State with stiff penalties for cell phone use while driving, another monkey law like seat belts which becomes monkey habit...

The person who runs a pedestrian down while texting? A tattoo of a cell-phone keypad on their fucking forehead and 10,000 hours of community service picking-up chewed bubble-gum off the pavement of AT&T cellular store parking-lots wearing a sandwich board.

Guy has a HUUUUUUUGE forehead...heh

@0:42 it looks like his forehead wound gets a boner.

Actually it's pretty easy to disarm someone within 3 feet of you -- the closer they are the better. (Bruce Lee popularized the idea but it's a concept that's been around for a long time.) We did it the other way though so as to break the trigger finger and keep the gun to the outside.
No need for a water pistol -- I would do this experiment.
I would get in front of a student, hands at my side. I WOULD TELL him: "I'm going to smack you in the forehead with my open hand. All you have to do is stop me. Ready?"
Within 3 feet you will always tag them EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW IT'S COMING. The human brain cannot perceive motion and react to it fast enough. Go ahead and try it for yourself...
The Hollywood cliche where one guy has a gun to the other guy's forehead makes me laugh. Dude could easily pluck that gun from him.
Now if the gunman is any further than 3 feet from you... then you ARE in trouble.