Orogun01

I expect any form of dialogue would be a list of ridiculous demands by the extremist that will resemble more to terms of surrender than an actual negotiation. I doubt that anyone with level of insane zeal that allows him to brutally murder children is someone you can negotiate with. A better recourse would be to negotiate with their allies, a group such as that is probably drawing support from nearby Muslim groups. Perhaps Niger; basically you cut off support, isolate them and strike. Basic Go strategy.

So cops beating the crap of guy on the middle of the street is okay but bugging meetings is appalling? I don't get you Wals, but maybe i'm missing something. What was the case about specifically?

The problem with making the constitution like an open forum is that every comment will be something along the lines of :"TL;DR"

Thanks to the wonders of 3D printing that's now a reality. I'll get to work on it.

Those are some of my favorite psych experiments, alongside with Pavlov's dog and that guy who used to lock his baby in a cage.

I mostly take solace in knowing that this was a deliberate sabotage by Nolan so they wouldn't make him make a fourth one.

They don't all have quotas For instance the department where my cousin (mentioned in the police thread) works only the motorcycle cops have quotas for how many tickets they give because that's pretty much their only function Also, I would say that the war on drugs, three strikes laws, for profit prisons, and a culture that glorifies criminal activity would be much more likely culprits for our ridiculous prison population They do encourage them to get arrest to show the boys upstairs that they are doing their fight on crime, meaning more funding, meaning statistics show a decrease in crime and everyone is happy. Or i'm I also wrong about that? Seriously, I'm hoping that's not the case for every precinct.

The system's fracture when it comes to police it mostly due to the fact that policemen have crime quotas (which is why they go out of their way to give you a ticket) in order to show that they are dealing with crime they have to make certain number of arrests (so it shouldn't be so surprising that the US is the country with the largest prison population). It is somewhat like a doctor telling you that you don't have cancer but since there is an excess of chemo that they need to get rid off you still have to take it.

You lost me at anime

You spoke about the group dynamics within professions that require a certain amount of danger. Within these professions it is understood that you need to rely on your partners with your life and that they rely on you. Normally when someone fails to conform to the group goals and dynamics there is some amount of hazing involved to try to weed out the bad behavior which put everyone at risk. When the group protects said bad behavior and regards it as the goal then there is something seriously ****ed up about it. In short, there really is no excuse to protect policemen who bully and abuse their authority even if you're a policeman.

I read this bit and imagined the constitution with "like" buttons by the amendments. The problem is this is the same line of thinking that causes cops to protect other bad cops. That tarnishing one of them tarnishes them all. No, being open and honest about your dealings with the public, investigating and - if necessary - taking action against cops who go too far will only tarnish the image of the police in the eyes of those who'll never trust the police. They're not all brutes; but the system shouldn't protect those that are, either. I didn't say it did. But if we can zero in on that aspect, I was taught it's art of ingroup/outgroup dynamics. The more distinct a group is, the more loyalty it feels to itself, and the more it norms on its own behaviours rather than those of general society. To an extent you want this to happen in any organisation deisgned to sacrifice life and limb - military, police, fire service. But when it goes too far it becomes toxic. One way in which to over-egg the ingroup/outgroup dynamics is to treat them like a uniform with a pig inside it. Although of course it depends on the context, and if they are being slack or over the top when you encounter them. Plus as I've already said, militarising the police doesn't help. I think that the gestapo despite all their training and espirit de corps would rat out the guy who was dating a Jew. They wouldn't go "Hey man, we get it. Some of these girls are hot" The actions of these policemen run contrary to the ideals of the organization, that the other policemen understand or help cover it means that on some level they also disregard the ideals and norms on which a police force was founded. If it really has gotten so bad that the police will not police themselves because of loyalty to miscreant elements within, then the whole organism is failing.

Extra! Extra! Developers have hopes and dreams. Read all about it!

What I'm concerned about is that there is a very loud minority of backers who I think originate mostly from a few hubs on the net and who will continue to try and take influence on the design. While my own preferences and theirs may align in some points, this is certainly not true for everything (I liked the durability mechanic, for one thing). Where's the problem? If customers raise valid complaints/ concerns about certain elements of the game that the devs simply hadn't thought of before, fine. I'm not asking for the devs to be uncritical of their own decisions. But if the design is changed simply to appease what is in all probability a minority among the customers, this is obviously not in the best interest of most of us. I'm not thrilled about a game whose specifications are tailored to the tastes of the Something Awful crowd and the RPG Codex. That's also not what I paid for, btw. I trust Obsidian's judgement based on their previous games. Maybe there is a vociferous minority, that doesn't exclude them from having a good point. Maybe in this case the developers felt that said minority was right and durability was a feature that did more harm than good and was detrimental to the overall experience.

Gas Fracking

Actually that Protect and Serve is something of a pipe dream, thanks to Warren vs The District of Columbia there is precedent that says that policemen have no obligation to victims of crime even if they are due to the negligence of the police. Translation: you could be mauled, robbed, mutilated, and more with a police officer watching without doing a thing and he wouldn't be liable for negligence.

They still should be held to the same standard, or do you agree we should give departments in bad areas more leeway?

I'll admit to having a bias, it's very frustrating to me that there are tax funded criminal running about against who you are not allowed to defend yourself and that there is little chance of legal action taken against them. I'm aware that there are decent people in the service, although at the same time I feel there is something very flawed about the system if a cop like Donner who had and exemplary service record and character references felt that his only recourse was to go on a cop killing spree. Plus, i'm disappointing that there were no reforms that rose from that incident.

Fireworks just burned a house on the other side of my neighborhood, luckily there was no one inside it, unfortunately the damage is pretty bad since the fire got pretty advanced. Plus the **** on this side of the block are still shooting fireworks constantly, and I do mean that literally. I took some sleeping pills, if I can't go to bed in the next hour I will start browsing the web for a rifle.

You know I think we can use LickedySplit as an example on the "The Science of why we don't believe on Science" thread. It seems he's is completely ignoring the situations in which these cases of police brutality happened, the circumstances surrounding them and all because he believes that cops are incapable of telling the difference between a perpetrator with a gun and some smart mouth youth who steps a little over the line. I think they can and that those situation happen because of they are able to make that judgment and they are both infuriated by the gall of someone questioning them and they have the leeway to abuse their authority because there are no great consequences.

They do the same thing every freaking holiday. Plus I regard any sound that happens after 12:00 AM to be noise and the cause to be deserving of extermination. Just think of me as the insomniac dog from those old Tex Avery cartoons.

So the big men with the big gun can't keep their cool when someone cusses at them? No wonder there are so many wrongful shootings. I often wonder about the statistics myself and whether the actually reflect the actual numbers since it's a bit of an honor system in which they have to be tried as being police brutality. There are cases which are either judged to be an acceptable use of force or that don't make it to court, so I wonder about their veracity. It just seems weird that in this case in which there were several officers involved not one of them questioned or stopped the use of excessive force and it seems from the look of other cases it seems common. So I don't think of a typical police officer as not being particularly praiseworthy or as much deserving of praise as any of us that goes around not breaking the law.

America has some of the worst crime in the world. Our police labor under extreme and constant stress in high crime areas. They see the absolute worst of humanity on a daily basis. Random cell phone camera footage is mostly good for showing things out of context. Half of the police 'brutality' clips out there are caused by idiots resisting arrest or just plain asking for it. As for the dogs getting shot, that can and should be avoided by using pepper spray. All police are equipped with it, shooting them is rarely necessary. Is asking the reasons why you're being detained considered resisting arrest? Or maybe not putting your arms behind your back because one of the officers broke it? Or maybe being face down on the ground, cuffed with a police officer's knee on your back is grounds to be tasered? I'm even surprised that someone would even try to defend those actions. If they are unable to cope with the realities of their job without falling into abuse then they should be declared unfit and discharged before the end up creating more criminals.

I don't, I seen what he calls 3d modelling and frankly I take offense. If he wants to make an attempt to fix that cluster**** that's the Gamebryo engine, I say : Godspeed!

The problem is that they are not which is why they know they can get away with it. So i'm kinda morbidly hoping for a case like the one Volo describes which makes all the way to the Supreme Court forcing them to finally make legislation regarding what the maximum use of force a police officer is allowed to use, in what circumstances its the use of force acceptable and what the punishments should be should they infringe upon the law. I know it's a little extreme but the reality of this stupid country is that a situation of such magnitude is what's required in order for them to address this issue, which it shouldn't be like that IMO.

Tonight whilst I try too sleep and i'm unable to due to my neighbors incessant firework display I will take comfort in planning different ways to shoot them from my roof using the sound of the fireworks to hide the gun sound. I seriously hate this fcking holiday and I wish my neighbors would lose their hands in a firework related accident.