search results matching tag: sights

» channel: weather

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (434)     Sift Talk (25)     Blogs (27)     Comments (1000)   

Vagina

Vagina

Liberal Redneck: NRA thinks more guns solve everything

harlequinn says...

No. While we're both wrong about their primary purpose (which after looking it up on their website is education and training people in firearms use), their other purpose is (from their about page):

"as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights"

https://home.nra.org/about-the-nra/

"Downvote for lying".

Oh really? Lol.

I've produced peer reviewed research supporting my views. StukaFox produced none.

There are opposing research papers of course (it is a contentious issue). But it takes a very short sighted person to produce a limited set of ABS data (lol, 2 years) and a Snopes article to declare that I'm wrong. Keep in mind I mentioned in my first comment that there were studies on this topic.

newtboy said:

Their mandate is to protect the manufacturer's rights to sell guns to anyone, not to champion citizen's rights. As such, it behooves them to quickly and effectively address mental health and access to guns or be legislated harshly by others.

I was pretty sure you were talking out your ass about Australia, now I'm certain. Downvote for lying. Thanks for actual data @StukaFox

Patrick Stewart Looks Further Into His Dad's Shell Shock

MilkmanDan says...

Possible, but I don't really think so. I think that the Medical minds of the time thought that physical shock, pressure waves from bombing etc. as you described, were a (or perhaps THE) primary cause of the psychological problems of returning soldiers. So the name "shell shock" came from there, but the symptoms that it was describing were psychological and, I think precisely equal to modern PTSD. Basically, "shell shock" became a polite euphemism for "soldier that got mentally messed up in the war and is having difficulty returning to civilian life".

My grandfather was an Army Air Corps armorer during WWII. He went through basic training, but his primary job was loading ammunition, bombs, external gas tanks, etc. onto P-47 airplanes. He was never in a direct combat situation, as I would describe it. He was never shot at, never in the shockwave radius of explosions, etc. But after the war he was described as having mild "shell shock", manifested by being withdrawn, not wanting to talk about the war, and occasionally prone to angry outbursts over seemingly trivial things. Eventually, he started talking about the war in his mid 80's, and here's a few relevant (perhaps) stories of his:

He joined the European theater a couple days after D-Day. Came to shore on a Normandy beach in the same sort of landing craft seen in Saving Private Ryan, etc. Even though it was days later, there were still LOTS of bodies on the beach, and thick smell of death. Welcome to the war!

His fighter group took over a French farm house adjacent to a dirt landing strip / runway. They put up a barbed wire perimeter with a gate on the road. In one of the only times I heard of him having a firearm and being expected to potentially use it, he pulled guard duty at that gate one evening. His commanding officer gave him orders to shoot anyone that couldn't provide identification on sight. While he was standing guard, a woman in her 20's rolled up on a bicycle, somewhat distraught. She spoke no English, only French. She clearly wanted to get in, and even tried to push past my grandfather. By the letter of his orders, he was "supposed" to shoot her. Instead, he knocked her off her bike when she tried to ride past after getting nowhere verbally and physically restrained her. At gunpoint! When someone that spoke French got there, it turned out that she was the daughter of the family that lived in the farm house. They had no food, and she was coming back to get some potatoes they had left in the larder.

Riding trains was a common way to get air corps support staff up to near the front, and also to get everybody back to transport ships at the end of the war. On one of those journeys later in the war, my grandfather was riding in an open train car with a bunch of his buddies. They were all given meals at the start of the trip. A short while later, the track went through a French town. A bunch of civilians were waiting around the tracks begging for food. I'll never forgot my grandfather describing that scene. It was tough for him to get out, and then all he managed was "they was starvin'!" He later explained that he and his buddies all gave up the food that they had to those people in the first town -- only to have none left to give as they rolled past similar scenes in each town on down the line.

When my mother was growing up, she and her brothers learned that they'd better not leave any food on their plates to go to waste. She has said that the angriest she ever saw her dad was when her brothers got into a food fight one time, and my grandfather went ballistic. They couldn't really figure out what the big deal was, until years later when my grandfather started telling his war stories and suddenly things made more sense.


A lot of guys had a much rougher war than my grandfather. Way more direct combat. Saw stuff much worse -- and had to DO things that were hard to live with. I think the psychological fallout of stuff like that explains the vast majority of "shell shock", without the addition of CTE-like physical head trauma. I'd wager that when the docs said Stewart's father's shell shock was a reaction to aerial bombardment, that was really just a face-saving measure to try to explain away the perceived "weakness" of his condition.

newtboy said:

I feel there's confusion here.
The term "shell shock" covers two different things.
One is purely psychological, trauma over seeing things your brain can't handle. This is what most people think of when they hear the term.
Two is physical, and is CTE like football players get, caused by pressure waves from nearby explosions bouncing their brains inside their skulls. It sounds like this is what Stewart's father had, as it causes violent tendencies, confusion, and uncontrollable anger.

Rick and Morty-The Poop In My Pants

RFlagg says...

Some takeaways from this.

Mr. Poopybutthole goes to the same high school Morty does, at least his universe's version. Said universe is Federation controlled.

While in high school, he has a cane, so this is all after he was shot, so how old was he when he was shot by Beth?

On one of the pictures, we see furniture that has been Cronenberged, which suggests there's a universe which is not only the furniture one, but that got Cronenberged.

Did they drop out and have to take a General Equivalency Test, or is that just what the report cards are called in this universe?

They aided, while still in their graduation suits, with a human-based world's overthrow of the Federation.

The toxic containment has already been mentioned, but his proposal also matches the one where he proposes to Morty (though I suspect he's his universe's Morty).

He's Jewish... or she is.

He can carry her, despite needing his cane, though we can see him struggling.

Dan Harmon once said Mr. Poopybutthole is an adult Meeseek, and that was canon, but here not only is he who he is in high school, we can see they are the same, hat and all, in utero. So they clearly changed their mind.

Finally, who's taking some of these pics? Some are where you'd expect somebody to take a pic, but others, like him falling in love in high school, at first sight, are a bit harder to explain (I know, I know, it's a show (or a show in a show) and don't overthink it)...

The Disturbing History of the Suburbs

Sagemind says...

In Canada, School funding is based on head count and not on housing taxes.
Interest rates are pre-set by banks but to the best of my knowledge, the same rates are given to everyone - there is no race-bias on who gets which loan rate.

Also, If I was to buy a house, anywhere, suburbs or not, my ability, as a white male is exactly the same as any other racial profile family. As someone who didn't have parents subsidize my income or schooling, my chances of owning is exactly the same as anyone else. In this, I feel that part of his argument isn't exactly accurate.

I'll even go a step further to say that, in fact, most immigrants to western Canada have more wealth than white people, and are buying out the housing market, most sight unseen, and above market value. In the Greater Vancouver area, most white people are now a minority, because they can't compete financially with immigrants and are being forced out of Vancouver.

Vox explains bump stocks

MilkmanDan says...

I think a 10% reduction is pessimistic, 90% like newtboy mentioned is likely optimistic.

One person being killed would have been tragic. A quick search says most recent count is 58 dead, 515 injured. Tragic has been surpassed by some orders of magnitude, and I while see what you're saying, I think it would have been meaningfully "less tragic" if he had only had access to traditional semi-automatic.

He had a bunch of weapons and a bunch of ammo. Reload time was partially mitigated by the number of guns. But finger fatigue like newtboy mentioned would have made it hard to keep firing over a prolonged time (~10 minutes of active shooting time?), and the increased time between shots plus potential for fatigue would have let people make a break for cover or to get out of line of sight.

It may well have still been the deadliest mass shooting even if he only had semi-auto. Banning bump stocks (and other full-auto conversions) won't prevent the next one, but any mitigation at all is better than nothing. And I think it would have been rather more significant than that.


Is access to full-auto or generally equivalent to full-auto the main problem? No. I fully understand your reluctance here, because I agree that GOP legislators and the NRA are likely to hold up opposition to bump stocks as a more significant badge than it deserves to be. "SEE?! I did something about it! Pat me on the back!"

...But, on the other hand, it really is a step in the right direction. And there are no real downsides, aside from that concern about giving those parties a sort of political card to play. The public will just have to make it clear that this, while good, isn't enough by itself.

ChaosEngine said:

@MilkmanDan, let's say he didn't have a bump stock. Do you think it would have meaningfully affected this tragedy?

If he had killed 10% fewer people (while it would obviously have been better for those people and their families), this would still have been the deadliest mass shooting in the US.

Basically, my argument is that plenty of people have managed to go on mass shooting sprees without bump stocks, and banning them won't stop the next mass shooting.

It's kinda like banning texting while drunk driving. Sure, you really shouldn't do it, but it's not the main problem!

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

Precisely. They have those guns in their hands, and don't shoot people.



The only things that I ding Hillary on are :

- Being a part of installing missile launchers on Russia's eastern border, and giving the asinine explanation that it's "to defend against Iran". Antagonizing Russia is so unnecessary and so old. I swear some people are just thirsty for the cold war to return.

- Cheating with the DNC in the primaries and screwing Bernie out of a win... who by the way could have carried the general election against carrot head. I'd rather have the Bern than either a sellout or a clown.


One side sees the other as paranoid.
The other side sees the first as short sighted.

I don't expect to be in a crash, I still prefer to wear a seat belt. But by all means, I don't care if someone chooses not to.

-scheherazade

ChaosEngine said:

And yet, gun laws DEMONSTRABLY work in other countries. There are plenty of other countries with high gun ownership rates (Canada, for instance), but nowhere outside the 3rd world has anything like the gun-related death rate of the US.

Meanwhile, you are caught up in some ridiculous fantasy where you save America from imaginary Hitler.

http://www.cc.com/video-clips/6l4l6m/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-scapegoat-hunter---gun-control

edit: fine don't embed the video, then!

A Good American - Trailer

bobknight33 says...

This documentary is about NSA annalist William Binney and his method to look at data. Hind sight connected the dots to 911.
NSA would rather use 911 as a trigger to get money from government for next 15 years than use William Binney Thin Thread program..

John Oliver - Joe Arpaio

newtboy says...

Bob....
Federal judges aren't Obama OR the DOJ. This is just one more lie you've swallowed hook, line, and sinker. It's the only way you can make sense of his pardon...make the conviction political. It plainly wasn't, even you admit he broke the law.

True, the DOJ wanted him convicted...but for NOT doing his job, and instead for stopping citizens and demanding their papers if they looked Hispanic. That's illegal in America, no matter why you do it. He was ordered by the courts to stop, and he defied that legal order. That's illegal in America, period.
Trump pardoned him because he doesn't respect the rule of law or courts...Unless he's using them to screw people he owes money, then the law is all important....bankruptcy law. He's shown this clearly repeatedly by disparaging any judge that might rule against him as "so called judges".

This isn't about illegals, it's about citizens that look Hispanic. By far, most pulled over weren't illegals or even immigrants. More importantly, it's about the rule of law, which he and Trump just flushed down the toilet with a cheer.

Sad that you are so blinded by partisan politics that you've lost sight of what America is about....laws that apply to everyone, not a ruling class that's above them, or laws that only apply when it's convenient for your agenda, but that's exactly what you're advocating here.
Advocating for lawless dictatorship isn't making us great, Bob. It just makes you sound dumb and gullible...insanely gullible. Take a civics class and learn about your country....please.

Edit: Honestly, Bob, it's becoming hard to believe you aren't really far left, pretending to be the worst kind of far right character, setting up weak straw men for us to knock down. You cannot believe that this is a good idea, condoning and pardoning violating the constitution and binding judicial orders...and even you cannot possibly believe that subversion of our systems is patriotic somehow.

bobknight33 said:

This has Obama and his cronies all over it.

The DOJ the left wanted him from doing his job.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio committed a crime by defying a court order to stop detaining suspected undocumented immigrants.


He defied a court order. He was doing his job... Trump is right in his pardon.

If you feel so bad for illegals you can house / feed / clothe then. Otherwise they can go back and quit taking American jobs.

Sad that you are not for American but for those who do not belong here. You can leave and make their country great... go leave and help them.

Near Miss

bcglorf says...

The moment the yellow can is half clear of the intersection the vehicle that cuts left when unsafe is already visible, aka clear line of sight. Predicting that another driver is likely to veer in for a head on collision is impossible. I've watched a couple times and can't see any turn signals either. What's with everyone getting on the biker here?

ChaosEngine said:

Other lessons possibly don't accelerate into an intersection with a yellow light when you don't have a clear line of sight?

Near Miss

Counter Protest Attacked In Charlottesville, Va

newtboy says...

Ahhh...ok...so there are a smattering of insane idiots that don't get they advocate forcing their group to accept, let's say Nazis into their hierarchy.
I certainly hope your leaders understand and don't support those short sighted idiots.
Keep in mind, there's a big difference between 'my group will hate you and complain if you do "x"' and 'you may not do "x"'.
Hires for businesses the church owns can't be discriminatory, not church hierarchy. Sounds right to me.
If there's no law, no complaints will be heard in the courts, at least here in the U.S.. Does Canada litigate legal civil behaviour?

You totally lost me with your last paragraph....but it sounds like you are confusing the ultra far left for democrats....they aren't. Sadly, they are being courted by democrats, something I would like to see stop.

bcglorf said:

I'm Canadian so maybe that's only a problem here from my country. We have complaints and confrontations against churches for not hiring or rejecting a hire based on sexual practices, or even in one case for being an atheist. We also have a 'women's only' nude spa facing human rights complaints for keeping out people with penises because they are women too.

http://vancouversun.com/news/staff-blogs/will-atheist-rev-gretta-vosper-obtain-no-fault-divorce-from-church

A 5 second google at least has some American tracking of demanding sexual practices be untouchable when religions or other clubs add new members or hires:
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/lgbt-employment-discrimination-churches_n_6082846

It is happening, and more importantly, whether the laws are all there already or not, the fact a complaint likely would travel to the supreme court at least is certainly a pretty legitimate concern about where that line is being drawn.

And hey, maybe the Dems don't want to try and find common ground with that particular demographic. The fact is though that there are plenty of anti-nazi people in that demographic and many others that the Democrats have currently cast as 'enemy' thinkers. The Dems need to pick some things they are willing to compromise on that will help them reach out to voters that didn't show up for Hillary.

Reduce Crime AND Save Money: Treat Addiction ...

ChaosEngine says...

The problem is that people are short-sighted. We HATE spending money on something if it doesn't
a) measurably improve my life in some way or
b) fix an obvious problem.
I'm guilty of this too.

Nice meal out? great!
Holiday? Fantastic!
New bike/snowboard/toy? Awesome!

Even if something breaks, your brain is ok with spending money to fix it.

"Damnit, the element broke in the oven! Ahh well, better go get a replacement"

But getting my car serviced? Ugh, it's running fine!
Intellectually, I know that spending some money now will save me more in the long run, but I am still irrationally annoyed by it.

Drug treatment is the same. If you spend money on drug treatment, crime doesn't get committed. Because crimes aren't being committed people see drug treatment as a waste of money.

Prevention is always harder to see the benefits of than cure.

Plus, it's REALLY easy to blame drug-related crime on drug users. It's easy political points, whereas saying you want to spend tax payer dollars on potential criminals? Admit it, even if you're liberal, reading that sentence triggers some mild outrage in your lizard brain.

eric3579 (Member Profile)

radx says...

ECB Research Bulletin:

In an economy with its own fiat currency, the monetary authority and the fiscal authority can ensure that public debt denominated in the national fiat currency is non-defaultable, i.e. maturing government bonds are convertible into currency at par. With this arrangement in place, fiscal policy can focus on business cycle stabilisation when monetary policy hits the lower bound constraint. However, the fiscal authorities of the euro area countries have given up the ability to issue non-defaultable debt. As a consequence, effective macroeconomic stabilisation has been difficult to achieve.

Translation:
- all members of the eurozone effectively use a foreign currency
- they can default, because they do not and cannot issue debt in their currency
- fiscal policy has thus been completely neutered

Ergo, national parliaments have a significantly smaller policy space compared to countries with their own currency. Our parliaments intentionally surrender power to unelected technocrats, even control of the national budget, which is the primary power available to any parliament anywhere.

"Sorry, lad. We cannot pay for healthcare/pension/infrastructure/education/wages/X, we have to maintain a balanced budget to appease the market." Yet it is still illegal to call for the guillotine...

Meanwhile, Japan doesn't give a fuck. The BoJ has been vacuuming up outstanding debt like there's no tomorrow. It currently holds in excess of 40% of all government debt, effectively canceling it. It's just book-keeping. The Treasury issues the debt, the CB buys the debt. Both are part of the consolidated government sector, ergo no debt. "Hyperinflation!", they scream. Can you hear them? Except Japan has been fighting deflation for two decades, with no end in sight.

Yet the inflation-hawks are still treated as persons of authority. Flat-earthers, the lot of 'em.

And my country wants the rest of Europe to sign on to the most moronic law in German history: the "Schuldenbremse", which makes running a deficit illegal at the constitutional level (except for undefined "emergencies"). They are either a) brainwashed, b) idiots, or c) straight up evil. And I'm not sure which one I prefer.



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