search results matching tag: one man

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.012 seconds

    Videos (336)     Sift Talk (10)     Blogs (15)     Comments (642)   

One Man's Trash Is Another Man's Gym

One Man's Trash Is Another Man's Gym

One Man's Trash Is Another Man's Gym

siftbot says...

This video has been nominated as a duplicate of this video by chicchorea. If this nomination is seconded with *isdupe, the video will be killed and its votes transferred to the original.

The Empire Files: John Podesta

radx says...

"Podesta's emails, and Podesta himself, show that the so-called progressive wing of the establishment is really just a neoliberal insider's club of the rich and powerful, who loyally serve their corporate masters. Podesta's emails are more than just a window into one man, but a window into how the empire's political machine is actually run."

That's one of those bits of info that are shrugged off as lunacy first by those who profit from it, only then to be shrugged off as having been known all along by the same people.

Again, back to Carlin: it's a big club, and you're not in it.

Man Arrested & Punched for Sitting on Mom's Front Porch

Mordhaus says...

I disagree. Police are not supposed to be our masters, we are not supposed to bow and scrape before them in the hopes we don't get sent to the stocks (or worse). Police are simply supposed to enforce the laws that we, as a society, have decided that we all should follow.

The problem is, we have allowed the police to become more than that through our own lack of care and mismanagement. A policeman should have to undergo more rigorous training and background checks, mental and physical, than any other service we provide to ourselves. Instead we pay them about the same as teachers and we let bullies into the system. We also allow people with significant evidence that they should never have positions of authority due to mental issues to become police. We do not rigorously punish the bad cops, nor prevent them from seeking work elsewhere, leading to the same type of thing that led to catholic molesters being shuffled about to molest again.

As far as police fearing others, can we finally say that the number of police fatalities are far less than the the ones inflicted by police? Yes, we have many guns in the USA, but the few times I recall of a police person being killed by one seem to revolve around them experiencing a retaliation style attack when you would least expect it (and not on a call), or when they are alone and on a remote call location. Yet most of these controversial police shootings of suspects seem to happen when they are in a group of officers with weapons drawn, which I would consider far less of a jumpy situation than being alone on a highway. If I am an officer, with multiple other officers nearby, I have weapons on the suspect (taser or otherwise), why am I more worried than if I am alone with a suspect? It simply doesn't make sense.

Finally, referring back to your resisting comment, have we not seen lately that you can still be shot while doing absolutely no resisting? One man was laying on the ground, hands in the air, while telling a mentally ill patient of his not to do anything that would get him shot, and the man on the ground got shot. Here in Austin we had a mentally ill man running naked in the street and he was shot and killed versus being tasered or taken down. The use of force, and the extremity of it, have not been shown to be merited. So if you can be shot and killed for not resisting, or simply not understanding the commands in the short time you are given to do so, what can we do? Should we carry a pair of handcuffs and a taser so we can pre-apply these items and give the cops less to fear?

bareboards2 said:

The cop had every opportunity to check with Charlie. Another safety issue for the cops? Going to a house they don't know? In that neighborhood?

And crappy as it is, he was resisting. Don't yell at a cop. Even when they are dead wrong. Just don't. Unfortunately that is just the way it is. Life isn't fair. And I know it is on top of hundreds of years of unfairness. And still. Tug your forelock, look at the ground, seethe inside. And you don't get arrested.

"You can't do that." Yes, unfortunately they can.

Did you hear what the female officer said at the very end? She told a fellow officer to "watch your back" when a car pulled up. Why? Because they might have a gun. These officers do live in fear for their own lives -- because we insist on "second amendment rights" and our streets are flooded with guns.

And does anyone think that the female officer was in the wrong here? She tried to calm everything down. She had no control over the cop who freaked when he thought the scary black man was calling on his friends to show up. And she resigned, lost her job, lost her income. I think she did the best she could under the circumstances.

I dare you not to find this mind-blowing!

gorillaman says...

I understood the message to be that women are nothing but a burden to men, and if only we could get them off our backs we could frolick and dance and really make a success of our one man shows.

newtboy said:

Was there a message intended?....because what I got was 'A woman can do amazing things if she has a strong man to support and guide her, but without him she'll just stumble along until gravity overtakes her and brings her down.' ....I have a history of misunderstanding, though, so perhaps I'm taking it wrong.

Unarmed Man Laying On Ground With Hands in Air Shot

enoch says...

i am just going to add to the opinions and perspectives that @MilkmanDan ,@ChaosEngine ,@dannym3141 and especially @newtboy who i agree with so clearly that i swear we are related.

since many dynamics have already been covered, i.e:police culture,racism,incompetence etc etc.

i shall offer a historical perspective in the ways of the power dynamic.

while this is a power vs powerlessness dynamic dealing with agents of the state,it helps to understand just how we got to this point,and it is NOT the first time we have been here.

see:labor movement of the 30's and the labor strikes,and the response from not only the business community but our own government.

see: the civil rights movement and segregation,and how demagouges used political power to divide by way of racism,and then used police to intimidate,beat and imprison.

there are many MANY examples here in america where the police have been used to suppress and oppress a people or community for less than altruistic reasons,and most certainly not aligning with the ideology we were taught in school the function of police.nevermind the syrupy sweet,idealized picture shoved down our throats since an early age.

so we see on our facebooks,our twitters and/or whatever social media you prefer,that black lives matter...and the counter point,that NO..ALL lives matter.

now this would make sense in a world that never took history into account,or a growing cultural norm of violence and oppression that had been slowly seeping into poor communities (mainly black and latino).

oh wait..
that's right.
social media pundits NEVER fucking consider any of those factors,because just like bill o'reilly,those are pesky nuances and context conflict with their own narrow narrative.

but let us consider them and how they may possibly be a major driving factor in americas current climate.

let us take ferguson as an example,that is a good place to start.
and let us go back to 2008,where we can see the boiling begin to take place in this extremely impoverished community which was already struggling.

the population is a black majority,poor to working poor.home ownership is low,food stamp recipients are high and the future is pretty bleak.

in 2008 ferguson received approximately 18% of it's total fiscal revenue from misdemeanor infractions i.e:traffic,parking,moving violations.small time stuff.basic fines for small infractions.in 2008 that number jumped to 66%.

why?
what happened?
what changed?

well the comptroller of ferguson (and greater st louis),along with HUNDREDS of other smaller municipalities across the country,had bought the rotten fish that wall street was selling in the form of bullshit derivatives.

now wall street and the big banks got their tax payer bailout,but towns like ferguson did not.they lost millions,sometimes billions.this meant pensions were either reduced or outright denied,because there was NO money!

but a town still has to pay police.
fire fighters and school teachers,
clerks and judges,
keep the roads paved and the street lights working.

so what is a local government to do?
can't tax the working class who own homes.you already jacked their property tax to the roof.
can't tax the local business,you already squeeze them as well.
how about those non-property owning people in ferguson?
they need to pay up as well,and let's use the police force to relinquish them of the paltry money they don't have.

to the tune of 66% of all of fergusons revenue.
that is insanity.

so what if you live in ferguson?
chances are you are black,and either poor or working poor.

you make,if you are lucky,20 grand a year and by one man's testimony he paid over 2,000 in traffic tickets in one year.the majority of americans dont see those kind of numbers their entire lifetime.

and what if you began to realize that it was not just you.that almost every person you know or talked to had similar stories.

would you begin to feel a tad bit targeted?

what if the city of ferguson started to become very creative with not only their rules but how they enforced those rules?

what if every year the fines went up?
not remained the same,but actually UP? every year.

what if,as a community people began to actually fear the police? to experience anxiety just by the sight of a patrol car,even though they were not engaging in anything illegal? and who knows...maybe there is some new ordinance on the books that you are unaware of?

would you become paranoid and suspicious of law enforcement?

and then..what if....you started losing friends to cops.people you grew up with being shot in the street,and every time the mayor comes out and calls it a "justifiable killing".

would that make you feel any better?
any less paranoid or anxious?

there was ONE police shooting in ten years and then..as if by magic ..(which is how the media seems to always portray this..shocking news..at 11)..you lose 5 friends in a year.all to cops..all "justifiable".

would you begin to think there was a conspiracy?
targeting you and your neighbors?

i BET you would.
i know i would.

now lets look at the cops.

they are just a tool.
an instrument for the state to uphold the law and write citations for infractions.they dont MAKE the laws,nor the infractions,not even the fines.

they just do what they are told.

and they are told to go into these poor and working poor neighborhoods and write tickets,a LOT of tickets.

do you really think they are unaware of the growing hostility towards them? the looks of disgust,fear and apprehension?

but...this is their job,and they do what they are told.

they see.
they know.
they are aware of the growing hatred towards them,and this makes them anxious..and defensive..and in some horrible,tragic cases...trigger happy.

a natural and normal response to heightened stimuli in the face of great uncertainty.

so they react impulsively and out of fear in a way that ten years ago would have been unheard of.

they think themselves good cops.
they do a good job.
they do what they are told.
and the people hate them for it.
so they respond instinctively and with poor judgement.

we..as citizens,respond with disgust and indignation when a cop abuses his/her authority.we see this as a major moral breach in the citizen/cop relationship,because we feel as agents of the law they should be held to a higher standard than the rest of us...and rightly so,but when you put a human being in a tense and dangerous situation,not of their making,they will fail at some point to react correctly and with sound judgement.

they SHOULD be held accountable,but so should the city council members and the mayor and all the local representatives who created this toxic climate in the first place.

the lesson to be learned here is that nothing is a binary situation when people are concerned.

so when black lives matter protestors address people to make them aware of the situation,this is what they are talking about.the police killing are only a last stage manifestation of a situation that began in 2008 on wall street.

and we need to be aware,because right now it is the predominantly black communities,but soon coming to a neighborhood near YOU.

the poor and working poor have become expendable.no longer relevant to the system.which is why police shootings are being handled the way they are.our value is ever increasingly being judged on how well we can feed the system.

until this disparity is addressed there will continue to be police shootings.people will die and there will be no indictments.

because police do what they are told.

it is up to us to make policy makers accountable for their actions,and in doing so address a toxic climate that both the poor,working poor and cops alike have to swim in.

stop forcing cops to write tickets to fund a city that lost it's savings due to fuckhead bankers.

this blood..all of it..is on those bankers hands.

Ken Burns slams Trump in Stanford Commencement

newtboy says...

According to him, but he's pathological. Prove it. It's possible he's in debt.

Being president does not hand the rule of government to one man....no matter what Fox News said. He has ZERO parliamentary power. We don't have a parliament.

A president can grasp power (see Bush2) for the office and, if not stymied by congress and the courts, might be successful in wrestling the reigns of power from it's rightful places in our system.

It's how he operates, what indication do you have that he would change his MO?

But you also said she's committed more Federal crimes than are countable (or that's what you meant to say), then went on to whine when I said Trump has LIKELY committed more Federal crimes than are countable...and I gave you specifics. If I can't say he committed them until he's convicted (and he has been found guilty of those crimes) then you can't say it until she's convicted based on YOUR own rules....but you can't follow that logic.

Yeah, that's what I thought....'I'm gonna say what I want to say, don't bother proving me wrong, because I'll keep saying it anyway'. You enjoy that....by yourself.

How is that different? You're still incredibly naïve by both definitions, and they aren't very different. One says lacking wisdom, the other lacking information. I say both are correct, and you resemble both.

harlequinn said:

He's a billionaire. Traditionally speaking society at large accepts that people with incredible wealth are powerful.

If he's elected then by definition no force is needed and he doesn't need to try and seize the reigns. He's the president. He has a lot of parliamentary power. The reigns are handed to him on a silver platter. That said, he's still got congress to deal with, and if it's a hostile congress then he could be pushing shit up a hill.

Thank you for your fascism elucidation. I disagree that system will happen if he is elected. It's almost fanciful.

I don't believe Clinton has been charged or convicted. That's why I said she's "innocent until proven guilty".

No, not satisfied. I'd need to see links to court outcomes. But I'm not that interested so don't bother on my behalf.

As per the Oxford Dictionary the common use of naive is: showing a lack of experience, wisdom, or judgement. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/naive

Dictionary.com doesn't cut it for me

Rashida Jones coaches Stephen on how to be a Feminist

newtboy says...

EDIT: It's flattering that my opinion about what might be right for me carries such weight that it seems like a command to some, but really, it's just one man's opinion, relatable only to those with similar mindsets. Taking it as a direction/command is on the reader, it was not written that way.

Asmo said:

Newt, srsly mate, you're overdoing the point. BB is right here, the word she chooses to define herself as is her business regardless of what that word means to you.

What matters is her attitude, and she has clearly and repeatedly espoused equality for all. I don't agree with everything she has put forward, but on that she has been very consistent. Now you're just doing what she mentioned earlier, keeping the conversation bouncing along on a thin pretext way past it's point of usefulness.

Amazing Comeback Save

Why Uber Is Terrible - Cracked Explains

Payback says...

Another issue... Uber is a taxi dispatching service for unregulated "gypsy" taxi drivers. It is NOT a "ride sharing" service.

Why?

A ride sharing service would be the Uber driver broadcasting out "I'm downtown, and I'm heading to the airport, anyone need a ride?" and if no one takes him up on it, and he GOES THERE ANYWAY BECAUSE HE HAD TO, he's ride sharing.

If he's just sitting around, waiting for a passenger to broadcast "I'm downtown and need to get to the airport, come get me." then he's a taxi.

Uber doesn't need to be regulated, but they SHOULD only deal with properly licensed, insured, and legal transportation providers. Even if that's just a one-man, one-car business.

Dubstep Robot Mime

Real Time with Bill Maher: Why Do They Hate Us?

Lawdeedaw says...

Oh, Rand Paul spoke like his father and that's what Maher loved about Ron...if I remember correctly Maher was foaming at the mouth to denounce Ron Paul. He would have swallowed a million gallons of Islamic jizz in order for one man to vote against Ron Paul...fuck Maher, little cock-weasel.

How to subdue a machete-wielding man without killing him

Jerykk says...

The raving lunatic with a machete is a clear threat to everyone in the area. Incapacitating him with tasers is far quicker and safer (to the cops and civilians) than trying to contain him with riot shields. Is there a chance that the taser could kill him? Sure. However, the chance is far lower than if you shoot him with a gun. And again, it isn't just the life of one man at stake. The suspect was obviously deranged, violent and unpredictable. At any point, he could have made a beeline for one of the cops or some random pedestrian and done serious damage. That's 30 minutes of putting lives at risk vs 1 minute of relatively safe tasering.

As for the possible positive outcomes... what, he recovers and leads a mediocre life working as a janitor because nobody wants to hire someone with a history of violent psychosis? How many years would it take to reach that point? How much taxpayer money would be spent? Is a single lost cause worth all that time, money and risk? If humanity were on the verge of extinction and every life really mattered then sure, he might be worth it. However, there's no shortage of perfectly sane and productive members of society that don't run around swinging machetes and howling like animals. Society already puts down animals that pose a threat to humans. Why not extend that policy to the most dangerous animal of all?

Deadrisenmortal said:

First statement = opinion
The remaining life of one man versus 30 minutes of time for 30 men.

Second statement = uninformed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Dzieka%C5%84ski_Taser_incident

Third statement = uneducated opinion
The incident involved a large number of trained officers presumably adequately trained to assess and address the situation

The entire last paragraph = biased conjecture
All projected outcomes proposed are negative. All possible positive outcomes ignored.

Troll Score = 10/10
Every word inflammatory and pointless yet I am compelled to reply...

Well played sir.

How to subdue a machete-wielding man without killing him

Deadrisenmortal says...

First statement = opinion
The remaining life of one man versus 30 minutes of time for 30 men.

Second statement = uninformed
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Dzieka%C5%84ski_Taser_incident

Third statement = uneducated opinion
The incident involved a large number of trained officers presumably adequately trained to assess and address the situation

The entire last paragraph = biased conjecture
All projected outcomes proposed are negative. All possible positive outcomes ignored.

Troll Score = 10/10
Every word inflammatory and pointless yet I am compelled to reply...

Well played sir.

Jerykk said:

This seems woefully inefficient. A few tazers would have incapacitated him a lot quicker and more safely and woudn't have required 30 cops with riot shields. This guy was a threat and the longer the cops waited to subdue him, the more likely he was to hurt someone.

And now the guy's in a mental hospital (probably on taxpayer money), receiving treatment that probably won't work. If he is ever released or escapes, there's a fair chance that he'll hurt someone or do something dangerous. If he is never cleared for release, he'll continue to be a drain on resources while contributing nothing to society or the economy.



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