ulyssessword
No bio...
User ID: 308
Ford. They fixed it in later model years, but still. I'm kind of with you on that now.
For some of the people confused about why Minneapolis is such a big deal still, it's not a scissor event, it's a mask off moment and puzzling how some people aren't just reasonably disagreeing, but out of their fucking minds.
From Sort By Controversial:
If you just read a Scissor statement off a list, it’s harmless. It just seems like a trivially true or trivially false thing. It doesn’t activate until you start discussing it with somebody. At first you just think they’re an imbecile. Then they call you an imbecile, and you want to defend yourself. Crescit eundo. You notice all the little ways they’re lying to you and themselves and their audience every time they open their mouth to defend their imbecilic opinion. Then you notice how all the lies are connected, that in order to keep getting the little things like the Scissor statement wrong, they have to drag in everything else.
You're exactly describing a Scissor Statement. From your view, it's not just true, it's trivially true, and you're pointing at people who are (inconceivably) holding the opposite view.
Everything is no longer fine; the system is breaking; its replacement would only be worse; beware of helping it along.
At least you aren't at this part:
How do you know there’s not an issue out there where, if you knew it, you would agree it would be better to just nuke the world and let us start over again from the sewer mutants, rather than let the sort of people who would support it continue to pollute the world with their presence?
Companies increasingly recognize that any small "lifehacks" or perk can be monetized,
My new car doesn't have cruise control, because I didn't think to check or choose the $2000 upgraded trim package (not that I could. It was used.).
At least Bush had 9/11. That justifies breaking some campaign promises IMO.
Well, not anymore, but you could have maintained a charitable stance right up to the end of his trial.
I mean if you hit somebody with a car you are always gonna be at least in jeopardy...
Then don't do that. Or if it's unavoidable, argue the point and easily win in court.
What's preventing good drivers from avoiding charges? As far as I can tell, the drivers can simply drive well and not get charged with anything.
I'm not seeing it. If you're going to blame the police for creating a speed trap that constrains how people can drive, then you might as well blame construction workers for creating a work zone for the same reason.
they can't convert every situation
That wasn't my claim. I'm saying there's none, ever. Either the suspect chose to assault the officer by their own free will (constrained by the situation, of course), or there was nothing a reasonable person could have done and it wasn't a justified shooting.
Have you ever heard of a situation where a driver was:
- Not at fault in a normal-driving-sense for what they did, and
- Criminally responsible for assault or some similar charge.
That seems completely backwards both for the elements of the offenses and the levels of proof required. Needless to say, I've never heard of it happening, and I'm having a hard time imagining it outside of cartoonish logic.
How many federal countries are there / have there been in history when the federal element had the ability to control the states but refused to do so?
Does fucking around so hard that they completely fail at their responsibilities and the Provinces take over international diplomacy and trade count? That was Canada under Trudeau for a while. Same with Saskatchewan unilaterally deciding it wouldn't pay the Carbon Tax on home heating.
- Prev
- Next

2000 (with more on the way), or about one per 50-60 illegal immigrants. Compare that to the UK police's one officer per 400 residents, most of whom aren't of interest to the police.
More options
Context Copy link