In many cases I would agree with that, nearly always when it's in public, but what about when the person calmly simply does not comply (knowing that's their right as a citizen)? That can also get you arrested. What if it's in a private home, that's been wrongly 'invaded' with massive force? Most people could not control their mouths when their family is being manhandled and threatened, especially when it's by the people paid to 'protect and serve' them. I know it's a 'rare' thing, but does happen repeatedly, seemingly weekly if not more often.

Contempt of cop is not an arrest-able offence, but it's often the reason for arrest. I hope you will concede that's an issue. More so when the cops blatant lies and abuse of power are the reason for the outburst, as in this case.

I love it when people follow up an angry outburst with "Okay?" It's always the funniest thing to me. No we're not going to follow along with your request for us to go fuck ourselves. It certainly isn't okay and all it shows is what is mentally wrong with you.

Oh and Video has been removed by user.

(Coprolite Preservation Managed)

chingalera says...(Chingalera Profile Page)
Below is an example of 'baiting'. I made the public announcement that I would be taking a hiatus from the site to draw-out the quarry: A person who would use his time spraying graffiti on a user's private personal area with a view to no resolution or truth, no self-awareness with the hope of a mutual understanding, rather than engaging in a civil and private discussion about his particular beef with me, chicco now comes with Krylon in-hand.

Unable to defend the indefensible, he degrades into personal-attacks and provocation with a single goal in mind-To attempt to compromise my integrity and provoke some public outburst.

Ain't gonna happen this time sir. I call bullshit when I see it, always have, always will.
5 hours 24 minutes ago up0downflag spam (0)ignore

chingalera says...
As I have asked civilly of you many times chicco, I would appreciate you not making comments to my profile page anything but a private matter. Again, and as have others I have asked (as I extend the courtesy to all, up-front) you simply ignore my requests of decorum because you understand that it is perhaps a type of balm for your self-injury this pestering me and poking at me personally. You rudely disregard this civil request made several times.

Ok, if you think it's a clever trap then that's what it is...a simpler explanation may very well be that once again one or a team of sophomoric pricks have a personal hard-on to see someone burn so they come to shit all over their profile page in that user's absence. This has been perpetrated before by other pricks with the same m.o. and those all tend to remain long-gone, but the flavor after the waft of their of shit continues to linger.

Again, no respect for my privacy.

(To the community-at-large, I continually ask chichorrea whom I have rubbed the wrong way by exposing his unilateral weakness to having his lying and cruelty exposed to remain private in spewing bile upon my profile page an in my absence, he instead litters it like some billboard advertisement announcing 'horseshit for sale')

If you are bound and determined with your unilateral project chicco and you know I'll bite to defend my integrity, why not wait until I come back to participate on this site with the community in-mind before throwing pebbles at my back door?

Who is actually displaying the cowardice here? Really?!

chicchorea said:
...oh, and here too....

There have been a number of posts whereby your conspicuous and transparent absence of response amply confirms all of my, and others' long before me, assertions about your dishonesty and cowardice. Further, your uncharacteristic cleaning house via deleting your profile pages of comments and most notably mine but retaining those of Newtboy whom you think you have bettered is telling as well.

...jailbaited you with this rat trap and you were all over it though. Weak minded and predictable you are.

You cannot refute that which I have repeatedly and amply purported and you dare not challenge me to evidentially support what I have lain down so you run and hide just occasionally sticking your head up to spew your drivel only to duck and cover again.

Run,,,run 'little...thing"...run.

I will be waiting. As you said where you should have not, "ain't done bruhh..."
6 hours 42 minutes ago up0downflag spam (0)ignore

http://www.10news.com/news/violent-outburst-by-camp-pendleton-marine-caught-on-camera-04022013

This has a lot of information on it. It states that the two in the car were too traumatised (also uses the word terrified) to comment. It also says that the guy cut them off and brake checked them a few times before they finally collided on the 5th attempt.

Also, isn't it a bit dangerous to let people like that loose in society? I'm worried enough already that some lunatic will get 'roid rage and randomly attack me without provocation (there are so many young lads on steroids right now) without having to worry about trained killers doing it. With the greatest of respect to anyone that has fought for a moral cause, i didn't necessarily ask them to do it in my name, nor should that be cause to expose people to the danger he poses.

This happened in April 2013. Here is an interview with the driver, after the fact:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNwTzaKd44U


In September, the military issued new guidelines to help control road rage. The "rules" sound completely insipid -- until you realize that they leave out an important phrase -- do you suffer from PTSD from your time in a military zone? Then, to me, these guidelines are calming and non-blaming.

http://www.armytimes.com/article/20130902/NEWS/309020008/Marine-Corps-takes-road-rage-after-outburst-caught-video

@mintbbb
hey hey stranger!
i dont know why you second guess yourself in regards to how you are perceived based on peoples subjective and highly irrational understandings.

humans...a curious lot.

you are a total sweetie.you are just super sensitive and some people never really understood that about you.
your husband is an idealist.
thats not a bad thing,in fact that can be a very good thing.

we NEED people to be dreamers and your husband is a dreamer and sometimes that can be frustrating if you are in an argument with him (which i have been).

i didnt always agree with him but i always liked him.

some here on the sift have questioned my friendship with @chingalera.
they didnt understand.
i seemed to be so much more approachable and less acidic in my commentary.
so how could i align myself with such a trollish sifter?

the answer is simply because i get him.
we BOTH are idealists.
just like your husband.
the difference lies in that both ching and i battle,on a daily basis,the rising tide of cynicism.

a cynicism that was born out of being beaten,imprisoned,lied to,betrayed and many times by the very people and/or institutions that we once were idealistic about.

disillusion is a real motherfucker.

yet we still retain that idealism.
we both are humanists.
we care about people.

so everything we do or say is with that at its heart.
so when ching is berating somebody,they may perceive that as an attack.
and it is but it is NOT an attack on them,personally,but rather an attack on their media-induced mythology.
or maybe a person is suffering a severe case of myopia and needs to be shaken out of their apathetic dystopia.

but its always,and i mean ALWAYS to get someone to look at a situation with a different perspective or challenge a belief.
to get people to actually think.
to not just give in to authority but to realize ALL authority is illegitimate until proven otherwise.

i tend to use less shocking and confrontational vernacular than ching does.so that may explain peoples confusion why i consider him a friend.

but if you understood his intent,the words he uses would have less of an emotional impact.

note* by my commentary i am not excusing,condoning nor dismissing chings very real outbursts that actually did hurt some feelings.
but i also know that when people get their feelings hurt they sometimes lash out (and i also suspect that those outbursts were in conjunction with copious amounts of booze).

passionate people are just as sensitive as the next and can/will retaliate in kind when hurt.i know i have.

which brings me to the actual point at hand (sorry..i tend to rant).

why would we remove/negate anything from the archives?
the organic growth and procession of a community should be held intact.
warts and all.
to remove,edit or scrub clean serves nothing,except to maybe repeat past indiscretions.

we never use the ignore button.
nor the sarcasm or jokingly.
so why would we erase the communities past dealings?
be they enlightening or incredibly droll?
its who we were and gives us all a marker where we may be going.

just a thought.

(I also posted this reply on his profile not realising in case that causes any confusion)

My 1st post in that thread was intended purely to inform. Most people I meet who own dogs are painfully unaware of what I was describing and consequently foster futile behaviour and negative emotional outbursts around things their dogs do (the idea that everyone in that thread already knows about this is laughable). This is far from the biggest ill in the world but it's there and I saw an opportunity to present an alternative view of events in the hope that perhaps someone somewhere might learn something (or at least consider an idea rather than just mindlessly following social tradition). Where I learned that idea is irrelevant, it stands or falls on its own merits.

Your response garnered hostility because it was indistinguishable from saying "your spoiling our fun by trying to suggest that the animal might actually be terrified and confused and our fun is more important than someone/thing suffering". You didn't try to challenge what I said, you simply indicated some level of disdain for the fact I was even trying to say something intelligent, or because I didn't mindlessly jump on the "look at the terrified dog" bandwaggon like the rest.

Your damm right it was an emotional response, the attitude you displayed from my POV causes untold suffering throughout the world (and I don't just mean dogs which in the grand scheme of things is relatively harmless). If you read my reply again you'll see that at no point did I suggest you were disagreeing with me, I was insulting you precisely because you didn't even try, you just tried to indite me for trying to raise the level of the conversation. It was that and that alone that garnered my hostility, I'm happy to be proven wrong or even for people to switch off and ignore me but to give me flack just for trying I have little patience for.

You have clearly misunderstood my whole argument against you, if I were to take my own advice then I would either challenge your point (which I did) or accept that I didn't understand enough to try and counter intelligently.

What you did was insult me for just trying to make an intelligent argument. That is where the " little gem of "Fuck You"" came from.

Also it's no good getting on a high horse about me being "over sensitive" when you took the time to jump onto my profile and unleash a boatload of bile yourself. That argument would only have worked if you said it to yourself and got on with your life. But you didn't, you felt you had to give me a piece of your mind just like I did.
I'm not going to call you over sensitive, I'm just going to call you human because that's what you are, just like me ;-).

Edit: for the record that Bill Hicks quote refers to precisely the kind of anti-intellectualism I'm accusing you of. It was because an audience member objected to Bill trying to raise an idea above the trivial self interested level that they felt had been threatened. Or to put it another way Bill had spoiled their fun by trying to make an intelligent point rather than just wallowing in their own unconsidered ignorance. As far as I'm concerned it was entirely appropriate.

That would just fuel Kanye's humongous ego, The Beast Which Cannot Be Fed, leaving him even more prone to future outbursts.

With that in mind here's a list of people that make me variously: scared, uncomfortable, upset and sometimes outright angry. I find it deeply unpleasant and sometimes disturbing to have to deal with them and I think life would be a lot better if we just locked them away.

Police
Politicians
Pro-lifers
Anyone who watches X-factor
Anyone who doesn't think the British royal family are murderous tyrants.
People who play music on their phone speakers on the bus/walking down the street.
People that use the term "free country" without irony.
The unregulated hyper rich over class.
Rugby players on a night out drinking.
People that advocate the death penalty.
Hyper nationalists.
Xenophobes, Racists and Homophobes.
The priesthood of amen/the brotherhood of shadow.
Young people in tracksuits/hoodies.
Anyone that uses the word "party" as a verb.
Practising Christians, Muslims and Jews (doubly so if they are raising their children religiously).
Hyper-Atheists.
Chimpanzees! (seriously, fuck the chimps they scare the shit out of me)
People that use the phrase "I just don't give a fuck" and actually mean it.
The Chinese scientists developing the "death robots" (you might laugh now....)

Whilst some are clearly more serious than others, all of the above represent things/traits which deeply concern me. Many of the people on that list I'd label as outright insane and/or seriously dangerous to my health and well being.

Some, were I to be confronted by them unexpectedly, would outright terrify me, much more so than that lady. There's a good chance that by simply responding with concern and a lack of antagonism she could have been talked down, but certainly pulling an incredulous expression and calling her a crazy lady is not likely to diffuse the situation one iota.

As I said before maybe she is a genuine danger to herself and others, such people do exist and there are systems in place to try and deal with it.

The issue here is that your not even remotely in a position to make that diagnosis, nor are any of us here. We don't know how serious her condition is or how likely she is to respond to various forms of treatment. Speculating based only on video's made during episodes (i.e. at her worst) with no context of her medical history just fuels the kind of knee jerk "lock them away" mindset that contributes heavily to these poor bastards getting the way they are in the 1st place.

For all you know a bit of in the community C.B.T. and mentoring might be all she needs/needed. Not everyone displaying psychotic symptoms benefits from or warrants full on institutional incarceration, it often makes things much worse.
She clearly needs/needed further investigation and perhaps having the benefit of her medical history and first hand interaction it might be reasonable to conclude that some form of isolation is needed. But I'd rather leave that down to those who are professionally qualified to make that judgement than bystanders who merely witnessed a few isolated psychotic episodes and know sweet F.A. about her as a person.

It's you that's failing to see the bigger picture here. You want to put her in a neat little box marked "crazy" so you don't have to face the implication that in some fundamental sense you are the same thing. The crazy person sits next to you on the bus and you think "I don't deserve to have to put up with this inconvenience. How dare they make me feel uncomfortable".......

....Do you have the remotest idea of the kind of deep lasting damage that does to a person when virtually everyone they ever meet thinks and behaves that way? How it feels for someone to just condemn you to be locked away without even attempting to understand what your all about?

It's only about 50 years ago that it was standard practice to basically label everything as just various forms of "madness" and lock them all away in the same building. While we've come along way there's still very much a ways to go and the public perception of acute psychotic illnesses is by far the most backwards.

If you'd said maybe she might need institutional treatment, or that you had concerns that the behaviour she displays could escalate to a violent incident (both legitimate concerns) then I wouldn't have reacted with such hostility.
But you didn't do that, you outright declared she that must be forcibly segregated and treated and moreover that she is definitely a danger to herself and others. No grey area, isolation is the only alternative!

I don't want this to descend into a personal attack, you might after all be a really nice person and this is a deeply rooted prejudice common to most people I come across. Much like many peoples homophobia isn't especially malicious it's just an unchallenged social convention (one fortunately that is changing).
But malicious or not the damage done is the same, for crazies, ethnic minorities and homosexuals alike. And I don't think its unfair to say that the "crazies" are the more vulnerable group by quite some margin.

You don't begrudge offering a little time and understanding for say a disabled person holding you up in a door way, why is taking a little step back when confronted with a "crazy" person so different? That postie clearly recognised she wasn't occupying the same reality as himself very quickly, but his response is to pull a face that says "what the fuck is your problem?" and just dismisses her as crazy. She might have calmed down and gone away peacefully in the space of a few mins if he'd tried to diffuse it, but he didn't, he escalated immediately. (because he's mentally ill too, just in a different way)
That's basically like someone getting in your way, you realizing its because they are in a wheel chair and then treating them like an arsehole because they had the indecency to be out in public and get in the way of the able bodied people! Those bloody cripples, they should be taken away for their own protection! (the fact the rest of us don't have to worry about dealing with them any more is just a bonus naturally )

Now obviously this is a somewhat flawed analogy as people with mobility impairments don't have heightened rates/likelihood of violent outbursts (though I'm sure there are plenty twats who just happen to be in wheelchairs). But the fundamental point I'm trying to make about how people treat the extravertly mentally ill stands. If your being directly threatened with no provocation is one thing, but this guy isn't he's just antagonising someone in a clear state of paranoia and delusion/misunderstanding (which he recognises within seconds). He doesn't even attempt to address that he just closes off and becomes passively hostile.
As I said before its understandable, but only in the same way as being frightened of homosexuality, alien cultures, physical disfigurement etc.. It's just cultural isolation, get to know a few people from any of those groups and it quickly starts to sublime into respect and understanding.

She didn't walk up to him screaming she walked up and firmly presented an accusation that the postman knew could not possibly have been true. She became aggressive/shouty only after he became dismissive, before that she was only restless and paranoid. And even then she didn't make any aggressive physical moves we can see. Postie doesn't look at all in fear for his safety to me, he turns his back on her several times and barely maintains eye contact, not the behaviour of someone that feels physically threatened!

How might she have reacted if postie had looked genuinely scared? Maybe she'd have backed off? Changed her attitude? And yeh maybe she'd have got even more threatening or attacked him with a stick too.

We don't know what she'd have done because we don't know her or anything about her other than a few paranoid videos on the internet. Leave the judgements to the people that have done the research, interviews etc. and know know what the fuck they are talking about with regards to this lady's condition and best treatment.

Speculation is one thing, outright declarations of fact is quite another. People are not guilty before you can prove their innocence...

Here's my anal retentive action for the day.

I disagree. I would say it is more for focused towards the person who is interested in cosplay, but still feel held back by self-confidence issues or perhaps an abundance of peer or familial pressure from actually engaging in cosplay. I believe the tone and stories told for this video support this view.

My original comment was more that it seemed to be aimed towards females. I was 5/6 joking (with the other 1/6 being ok with it.) I view it similar to women working in IT. I've seen special programs set up that are only women for IT career advancement. While I experienced a small internal outburst of oppression (caveat - it's not oppression), it makes perfect sense as it is simply a fact that women are a minority in IT (generally.) I'm perfectly fine with groups that are trying to help individuals overcome possible stigmatisms while trying to do something they are interested in.

Just to be clear, Chiropractic care is VERY MUCH "Western" medicine. It is a bit over 100 years old, but just as much pseudo-science as the grand-daddy of quackery, Homeopathy.

There are many practitioners that mix it with non-quackery, like Physical Therapy and Massage Therapy. There are some that mix it with traditional "Eastern" medicine, like acupuncture and herbal medicines. But that doesn't reduce it's quackery.

And certainly, there are many questionable practices in non-alternative medicine, especially with behaviorally-difficult children. But it isn't their fault that there is medication that lessens the severity of these outbursts. Don't blame the doctors for giving parents what they ask (and pay) for. Blame the parents who are looking for a quick fix, rather than spending time with their kids to fix the real issues. These are cultural issues, not specifically issues with the medical establishment, the same as obesity and diabetes.

The true way to tell if someone really understands alternative medicine's issues with mainstream medicine is to bring up Chiropractic care. If they can fault mainstream medicine for treating the symptoms and not the core issue, and they feel like adjusting alignment of bones is better than a PT working to heal your body so it can handle it's own alignment, they're really just being contrarian and anti-authoritarian, Not actually being logical with their choices.

*nochannel
I don't think anything here can rightly be called "comedy", even *dark comedy. It is a decent critique of the typically ridiculous american *news coverage from a *british perspective of the *death of a former *law enforcement officer at the hands of his former colleagues.

But Charlie did get one thing wrong. This isn't a story we (americans) have seen a hundred times before. This wasn't the same as some nutter letting loose in a movie theater or school. This was a man who despite being clearly disturbed focused his violent outburst on those whom he felt had personally wronged him and whom he believed (and many americans believe) are corrupt to the core. I'm not trying to justify or condone what Dorner did, but I think the public's reaction to him is very different than to any previous high profile "shooter".

Uh ... no. I was "jokingly" [see designation] referring to the outburst of laughter from the observers when the bird popped the top. I'll try to be more specific next time

People are being killed on both sides of the border. More than 10:1 are not Israeli. Israel can democratically control their fighters. The other people are not so organized. People on both sides suffer while leaders try to score points. Mostly it is non-israeli people suffering though so it is hard to side with Israel on this one. The only solution as many experts have pointed out is a single state solution with people living as equals with equal rights. As long as you try to separate people we will have these outbursts of violence.

>> ^bareboards2:
@Reefie, for what it's worth, I don't think you are an evil monster or a lowly wretch for having a different opinion than Yogi.
I hope this thread doesn't devolve into a pissing match. Just a hope. No way to stop it.
Sigh.


Wouldn't worry about it, I'm not prone to take such outbursts personally! My humour is rather dry so I'm guessing the tongue-in-cheek undertones didn't come through in my last post, sometimes the written word adds so much - other times it loses something in translation

About the only thing worth saying is that I myself am rarely offended by anyone else expressing their opinion, whereas the hard-working people of the BBC and NHS who provide quality national services to the UK might be somewhat displeased by opinions expressed by those who don't actually reside in the UK and therefore lack the first-hand experience that is so helpful in generating informed and accurate insights into the reality. Like I said to begin with, I don't take Yogi's opinions personally so I'm fine, but maybe a bit of consideration for the thousands of people's feelings for whom such comments can be personal and disheartening isn't too much to ask for.