Gromnir

any way to change the title o' the thread? beer run 2016? places to see between beer stops 2016? could go with the dr. strangelove route. hurlshot's summer rv trip 2016 or: how i tricked my family into supporting my month long beerfest. hmmmm. something to think 'bout. HA! Good Fun!

This article sums it up very well. we found the article to be insightful... but just for perspective, a bit o' info 'bout the author is useful. author worked as a cop for almost five years 'tween 1994 and 1999 after which he quit. a few years later he went to work for the naacp as a field organizer. he is also affiliated with the aclu, but as Gromnir is also having ties with aclu, we did a bit o' cursory checking and we find little save for acknowledgement that at one point he were a "program associate." job title is a bit misleading. aclu program associates do general ofice support such as answering phones and making photocopies. currently the author is a politician who has made numerous attempts to run for office in missouri as he lived in ferguson, missouri. after the events in ferguson, police reform became a major cornerstone o' his campaigns. he also has written articles 'bout the inherent racism that prevents black communities from electing black representatives. author had a similar oped piece in 2014... washington post. were almost immediate after robert mcculloch announcement. drew considerable ire and criticism from any number o' folks in law enforcement. am certain you can look for the wp article and the comments that followed. is more than a couple response pieces as well. the linked is interesting. not saying otherwise. HA! Good Fun!

ah, much better. were admitted conflicted 'bout images o' strip mines in the territorial lands o' the lakota, and monuments o' US Presidents defacing holy places in the Black Hills. so endeth emo-Gromnir. we don't drink alcohol, but am admitting that your coors visit almost makes us consider taking up a new vice. have fun. stay safe. HA! Good Fun!

And that's why Donald will be USA new president. almost 25k likes for trump? golly. one wonders how many o' the legion o' social media followers will actually drag themselves to the polls to vote. as an aside, we believe that more consideration o' blm complaints is a good thing, though not for obvious reasons. how many Decades did it take for a commercial plane crash to ever be caught on film? were actual conspiracy theorists that claimed that plane crashes were a myth being created as some kinda cover-up precisely 'cause there were never any filming o' the crashes. 'course with the advent o' cell phones with camera and video capture, we got sudden get loads o' plane crash video. is not that plane crashes sudden increased. up until two years ago, violent crime, all violent crimes, were decreasing in frequency in the USA. such decreases included police shootings and responding attacks 'pon police. is a good thing that we no longer need wait to read 'bout such violence in our local news papers the day following events. perhaps a few o' the national outlets carried such news o' police related violence as well? regardless, 'cause we weren't seeing such police-related violences, it weren't part o' our consciousness. today we get news much faster, and every time an arrest is made in public, crowds pull out their cell phones. every time a 300 lb minority man (or woman) is wrestled to the ground while Resisting arrest and becomes injured in the process, we got people marching in the streets o' philadelphia and dallas. in spite of the significant overall decrease in violent crimes in this country, there is instead a perception o' an epidemic o' such. as such, blm is not significant because it makes us aware o' widespread violence being perpetrated 'gainst minorities. however, blm is meaningful, and hilary clinton is correct that more attention need be paid to african american concerns. that being said, is not the voiced concerns o' blm that we should worry 'bout most, though such concerns cannot be ignored either. yeah, listen to the complaints, but the actual reason to listen is to be hearing the widespread anger, fear, and hopelessness. regardless of 'ethnic background, lower income families and individuals were disproportionate hurt by the economic downturn. we posted elsewhere that new jobs created since the economy has improved has gone almost exclusive to people with at least some level of college education. there has been no economic recovery for a large % of our african american population. the highly educated immigrants from nigeria is doing fantastic in the USA-- those african americans is living the american dream. too few. blm is not actual revealing an epidemic o' police violence directed at african americans. until ferguson, such violence had been steadily decreasing. unfortunately, there is now greater fear and anger o' police than ever before. the police is scared too. in places such as chicago where we has seen recent spikes in violence o' all types, cops, in part as a reaction to blm, has been less willing to do their freaking jobs. http://www.npr.org/2016/03/11/469974819/chicago-murder-rate-spikes-less-aggressive-policing-blamed there is a problem. as a nation we need to listen. unfortunately, we thinks we is missing the real message hidden in all the noise from both sides o' the debate. blm. black lives do matter. is not cops that actual threaten the ordinary black citizen. there is a systemic flaw that is growing worse in this country, a flaw that makes it prohibitive difficult for those without to get more. no home ownership. no career. no hope. the police stuff we see on tv and internet is terrible. we need listen. we need education o' cops that failure o' the "attitude test" is not a legit reason to punish citizens. we need educate some segments o' our minority population that when confronted by an armed police officer who could be racist or simple having a bad day, the smart response is Not to become aggressive or confrontational-- you ain't a punk for following the instructions o' an armed policeman. etc. *sigh* unfortunately, by focusing on the problem(s) o' police violence, we once again take our eye of the real problems faced by many US citizens today. poverty. fear. hopelessness. get folks jobs and homes and a freaking future. so many o' these other issues will disappear if we were to find a way to give all american citizens real hope that tomorrow will be better than today. HA! Good Fun!

yeah, the bound boxes is a bit o' a disappointment. bioware responded that they admit that bound is not ideal and they are considering solutions. on the other hand, the xp bonuses on the dvl armour set is actual rather impressive. with the three pieces you now got, the armour provides +25% xp. full armour set is gonna be +50%. the armour is bound to legacy and usable at level 1. is nice armour for new characters you create in the future. HA! Good Fun!

if mass murderers and terrorists were more interested in getting away, there would be far fewer mass murders. HA! Good Fun!

find a conviction under the applicable statute. we will wait. compare to such stuff as epa or traffic statutes is not gonna be helpful, or relevant. and for reasons stated by comey multiple times, the attempt to pioneer new legal ground would be a fail in any event. is not an easy burden for a prosecutor to overcome. has never been a gross negligence conviction under the statute. 'ccording to comey, only once since 1917 when the statute were passed has there ever been an attempt to utilize gross negligence as 'posed to actual intent. sure as hell ain't gonna use negligence or, god forbid, strict liability as the ridiculous article linked suggests. keep looking to random sources that appear to support what you wanna believe is not a good way to educate self. nytimes coverage were a bit sketchy, so we will avoid linking https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-director-set-to-appear-before-congressional-committee-to-answer-questions-on-clinton-investigation/2016/07/07/eb43ec7e-43c1-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_comeyhearing-1pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory HA! Good Fun! Lots of prominent lawyers think she could've been indicted, so they don't agree with you or Comey. So gross negligence standard can be used in lots of other cases, but not under the espionage statue, even though it's explicitly in the statue? Doesn't make sense. And your definition of gross negligence doesn't make sense either, if I leave a manhole cover open and someone falls in and gets killed, I'm not liable? Good to know. Comey bent over backwards to find a way not to indict her, both on gross negligence and intent, since she knowingly exposed top secret info to both her lawyers and her network admins. for not proper returning a manhole cover? chances are you would not be criminally liable. thank goodness. why would you wanna send somebody to prison if it were an honest mistake? sure, you would face civil liability, so you would likely be paying for the mistake for the rest of your life, but w/o intent we rare send folks to prison. seriously, what kinda screwed up world is you trying to advocate wherein honest mistakes in judgement w/o any criminal behavior is resulting in criminal liability? even when such liability exists in statutes, rare does prosecutors and/or finders of fact criminalize such behavior. gross negligence is an option to prevent fumbduckery from allowing folks to literal/figurative get away with murder. is not ordinary. extreme limited number o' situations. requires statute. and comey already addressed the Congressman's concerns, most o' whom is lawyers. the statute that clinton would be criminalized under has been in existence for 99 years, and never has there been a criminal conviction using the gross negligence provision. the lawyers who has pretended to be baffled by the fbi recommendation is treating the situation as if it were a 1st year law school crim law exam question rather than a real world prosecution. yes, under the letter o' the law, there is potential liability for clinton. yes, clinton deserves some kinda punishment. unfortunately, comey, a dyed-in-wool republican and a no-nonsense advocate o' law and order, has observed that in the Real World where most o' us live, no reasonable prosecutor would willingly take such a case to trial. some o' the questions is genuine mind boggling. prosecute clinton's attorneys for viewing documents that after-the-fact were revealed to be classified? comey is having a hard time answering questions from Congress 'cause such is often ludicrous even if they seem valid to the average and uneducated. hell, You linked to an article that were using strict liability examples as some kinda proof o' how clinton's negligence could be criminalized. the gulf 'tween what you think you know and what is reality continues to grow rather than shrink. am not a fan of the clintons. bush gets blame for the recent economic problems, but the banking fails that led to the real estate implosion began 'cause o' the clinton administration. is too many examples o' both clintons being dishonest. in spite o' bruce feelings on the subject, the obama administration handling o' the middle-east, russia and a whole laundry list o' foreign policy issues is gonna, in years to come, be case studies in incompetence... and we ain't yet certain how much clinton supported the general erosion o' US influence 'cross the globe. etc. we don't mind seeing clinton squirm. even so, this email thing is getting predictable ridiculous. am understanding that the point o' the hearings is actual to damage clinton's Presidential hopes as 'posed to getting at the truth o' what illegal activity, if any, were resulting from clinton's monumental stoopid private server, but as Gromnir is actual naive enough to still have respect for the integrity o' the process, what we is seeing and hearing makes us a bit nauseated. clinton supporters is gonna see a witch hunt. folks who hate clinton is gonna see a cover-up. is all largely pointless as the dialogue is simple polarizing opinions that already exist. HA! Good Fun!

find a conviction under the applicable statute. we will wait. compare to such stuff as epa or traffic statutes is not gonna be helpful, or relevant. and for reasons stated by comey multiple times, the attempt to pioneer new legal ground would be a fail in any event. is not an easy burden for a prosecutor to overcome. has never been a gross negligence conviction under the statute. 'ccording to comey, only once since 1917 when the statute were passed has there ever been an attempt to utilize gross negligence as 'posed to actual intent. sure as hell ain't gonna use negligence or, god forbid, strict liability as the ridiculous article linked suggests. keep looking to random sources that appear to support what you wanna believe is not a good way to educate self. nytimes coverage were a bit sketchy, so we will avoid linking https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-director-set-to-appear-before-congressional-committee-to-answer-questions-on-clinton-investigation/2016/07/07/eb43ec7e-43c1-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-more-top-stories_comeyhearing-1pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory HA! Good Fun!

well, you don't exact look like a xiao-liang liu, but is possible http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/photographer-of-the-year-2016/gallery/week-8-nature/3 that yours? HA! Good Fun!

too many images to post. the national geographic travel photographer o' the year contest winners were announced http://travel.nationalgeographic.com/photographer-of-the-year-2016 HA! Good Fun!

HA! Good Fun!

we see that there is still ubiquitous misunderstanding regarding gross negligence. please looks above at our earlier post. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/87025-us-election-2016-part-ii/?p=1825704 we gave multiple examples o' gross negligence. doug shoots somebody in the leg but doesn't intend to kill. doug drives while drunk and 'causes a fatal accident. doug uses bungee cords to strap down a child in a car. please note that in all such cases, doug intended to commit a crime, but he did not have intent to commit homicide. fumbduckery doesn't result in a get-out-of-jail-free card for doug. again, doug actual had criminal intent in all our examples, but it just weren't the ordinary requisite intent w/o the benefit o' a statute that makes gross negligence applicable. again, gross negligence is not simple a measure o' horrible mistake. negligence is mistake. gross negligence requires fumbduckery and an otherwise unlawful act. is more than a terrible mistake. *shrug* gross negligence were gonna be extreme difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. we didn't follow the hearings today, but is our understanding that a clinton prosecution for gross negligence woulda' been a singular and noteworthy exception. people has been disciplined and/or fired for similar stoopidity as displayed by clinton and her people, but has never been criminalization. that being said, am thinking that the bigger picture is being missed by folks on the right who is distracted by the allure o' a potential criminal indictment. comey is not gonna be able to do clinton any favors with these hearings unless rebublicans make it seem like they is involved in a witch-hunt. comey weren't investigating clinton regarding her truthfulness to the public or Congress, so such questions directed at comey is little more than grandstanding. is our opinion that republicans should be focusing instead on the details o' "extremely careless." the magnitude o' clinton's stoopidity in this matter must be brobdingnagian. instead o' trying to find a way to criminalize clinton, we see far more potential clinton pain in revealing that a future President o' the United States of America were comically inept. trump is already viewed as a cartoon character by folks who dislike him. curiously enough, trump can't hurt his image by saying stoopid stuff. somehow when trump blurts out idiocy, folks who like him see such as genuine... trump, at least, is real. *snort* part o' the appeal o' clinton over trump is that she is a competent politician who would represent the office with appropriate dignity. republicans can serious diminish that perception. turn clinton into a joke. make her a punchline. has folks think o' clinton as cartoonishly incompetent. if Gromnir wanted to hurt clinton's Presidential aspirations, we would be focusing on her incompetence rather than her potential criminal liability. HA! Good Fun!

change to "morning of" the fbi presser doesn't actual help diminish the notion that the rather dramatic change on free-college were precipitated by the email crisis, does it? but we do agree that it would take something drastic to prevent clinton from being elected. HA! Good Fun!

lack of indictment hardly ends the race for sanders. sanders knows he can't have the nomination, but he wants issues addressed. well, guess what? sanders supporters, folks who has stated that they would not under any circumstances vote for hillary clinton, is now more relevant than ever. the email scandal is actual just getting started as now we is gonna have congressional hearings to address the fbi investigation... in depth. does anybody look good when investigated close by law enforcement? those hearing is gonna last through the election. is gonna be ugly. is always ugly. last week, clinton didn't need sanders or his supporters. come election time she may very well need every vote... or maybe not. we do know that today, in her first public address since the release o' the "extremely reckless" comments from the fbi, clinton announced that she were gonna adopt free-college plan, which were a major sanders pledge. yeah, the race for the nomination is long over, but "it goes on hillary, the race is not over." HA! Good Fun! ps only partial tongue-in-cheek. clinton did do a sudden 180 on free-college. is no coincidence that such happened after fbi presser and following the moves by republicans in Congress to get hearings started.

well, if you can't do the work now, chances are that after the next few months o' mastic hell, you will. have fun. HA! Good Fun!

be stronger. *shrug* US has many states that is bigger than european countries. on a global stage, small is at a distinct disadvantage. perhaps luxembourg has a vibrant movie industry, but how does it compete with USA? the disparity in volume is impossible to ignore. is also kinda hypocritical. how many cultures in europe was wiped out, absorbed, and/or forgotten over the centuries? have sherman set the way-back machine for a time remote enough from the present, and every fertile river valley in europe woulda had its own unique culture. current euro nations destroyed and absorbed many cultures now forgotten. inevitable. the world keeps getting smaller, and cultures is becoming increasing shared rather than unique. and the pace o' change is increasing. fear o' assimilation, sadly, will only hasten the demise o' smallish nations and peoples. in the current world that is changing and evolving at a dizzying pace, the way to combat assimilation is not through isolation or rejection o' the more dominant cultures on the planet. share. become integrated and integral so you ain't lost and forgotten. as a member o' an endangered culture, we do have concerns 'bout the seeming inevitability o' our lost language, history and identity. is a concern for us. even so, we realize that fear o' the dominant paradigm will not stop or even slow the rate o' cultural decay and loss. and perhaps it makes you feel better to know that the lifestyle and culture o' a place such as williston, north dakota, a fracking boom town going bust, is gonna be far different than south beach in miami florida. heck, every couple years we gets to hear 'bout the south's culture and heritage is in danger o' being lost. bits and pieces o' what was once unique and essential American culture is lost and altered all the time. your same concerns is echoed in small towns 'cross every state in the USA. HA! Good Fun!

first link is kinda repeating what we said 'bove 'bout criminal/gross negligence. perhaps is easy to get terminology confused. when doug shoots victor in the leg w/o actual intent to kill... *shrug* but again, for a showing o' gross negligence, you are requiring a level o' fumb duckery that is extreme. now, if is true that folks is routinely prosecuted for far less than what clinton did (failed) to do, then we would be concerned, but to cherry-pick isolated cases where indictments did occur is hardly compelling. HA! Good Fun!

california coast is very nice. usa is enormous, so you can find pretty much any climate you wish. heck, some states is large enough such that they is having every conceivable weather category within the boarders. snowiest place in the usa is in ca, and a two hour drive from snowiest will get you desert or mediterranean or whatever... HA! Good Fun! ps manifested may have some legit claim to best weather. personal, we find endless perfect weather to be boring, but we can see the appeal.

why not? even in socialist nations, the marketplace o' ideas is the dominant paradigm. thank goodness. am also not certain what people thinks is american culture, given just how eclectic and diverse is the usa... particular compared to european nations. usa culture is constant changing and indefinable. is always absorbing, refining and exporting ideas from every corner o' the earth. "Why would you want to go from Sweden to the US. They already have more benifits of every conceivable kind than practically everywhere else." well, if you are self-sufficient and successful, you don't need rely on benefits. that being said, the increasing polarization o' the haves and have-nots in the USA is discouraging. the middle class isn't actual disappearing, but the working class american, once the foundation o' the US population and economy, is now becoming relegated to second-class citizen status. recent studies show that virtual all new jobs created since the recent economic downturn has been for folks with at least some level o' college education. changes need be made. even so, if you is successful, the USA is a fantastic place to live. HA! Good Fun!

am thinking that a bit o' the anger from folks who were disappointed by the fbi recommendation is due to a misunderstanding regarding what is gross/criminal negligence. gross negligence is not accident or mistake. when we thinks negligence, we think mistakes, yes? so gross negligence would be a particular bad mistake, yes? no. gross negligence is more o' a "wtf is wrong with you" standard. doug shoots vincent in the leg but weren't actual planning on killing vincent. intent were to scare vincent and nobody were more surprised than doug when vincent died. doug drives home while intoxicated. doug didn't have cab fare and his home were only a few miles away and he didn't think he would cause an accident. doug didn't have a baby seat for his child, so he thought the bungee cords in his trunk would suffice to keep the baby secure in its seat. etc. negligence is actions that is unreasonable. gross negligence requires fumb duckery levels o' stoopidity or indifference. comey referenced clinton's actions as being "extremely careless." am certain that such words were chosen careful. if Gromnir were forced to explain gross negligence w/o using any legal jargon, we might use "extremely careless" to describe the requisite state-o'-mind. if there is a meaningful difference in English 'tween recklessness and extremely careless, it is gonna be so minuscule a gnat would starve on the difference. even so, comey recognized that, "no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case." why? well, in similar situations in the past, folks has presumably been fired as 'posed to prosecuted. also, as we tired to stress above in this post, fumb duckery is a rather difficult threshold to overcome. you got an extreme smart, presentable and well-prepared defendant so proving gross negligence beyond a reasonable doubt is gonna be a more difficult task than in an ordinary prosecution. bruce asking trump to apologize is kinda misguided here, 'cause comey were pretty darn critical o' clinton. 'ccording to comey, there, "were evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information." comey also made clear that an ordinary member o' the State Department would face consequences if they had acted with the extreme carelessness that clinton displayed. thanks to ny times v sullivan, a case that trump loathes, is no way trump would ever need apologize. is more than a few football fans following this board, yes? comey's comments 'bout clinton reminded us more than a little of the presser by fred bright when he announced that he wouldn't be pursuing a sexual assault/rape case 'gainst ben roethlisberger. both comey and bright took the opportunity to public chastise a celebrity, but in each case, the burden o' proving beyond a reasonable doubt made prosecution o' a case untenable. HA! Good Fun!

*image* the ironic part being that the mechanical keyboard we is using started doing the double-s nonsense. am hoping there is dog hair or somesuch simple impediment gumming up the works. perhaps bacon? HA! Good Fun!

needed intent and/or more. couldn't show intent. weren't enough for gross negligence. HA! Good Fun! ps you are also misreading "intent." espionage and treason would be at issue if we were discussing intent to inform russians through unsecured emails. clarification: intent, when speaking o' criminal negligence and recklessness and gross negligence, does not mean that the defendant actual intended badness to happen. criminal intent/recklessness replace need for actual intent in very limited situations. would a reasonable person understand a danger, but the defendant acted with reckless disregard o' such dangers to human life or with indifference to consequences. law and english is not the same.

She was lying. If that bothers anyone. well, is not lying if one assumes that ms. clinton were really incompetent. hillary clinton, the "extremely careless" choice? *shrug* as o' july, 2016, ms. clinton's failure to take proper security steps with classified information appears to have been a given. not debatable. the fact that fbi couldn't find evidence o' willful disregard or intentional subversion o' security protocols is less than shocking. the investigation were too remote from actual events to have been anything other than pro forma. unlike enoch, is tough for us to see the mishandling o' classified emails as "whoopsies." using a private email server for correspondence that had even the potential o' resulting in communications o' classified info were, in and of itself, careless. if we were talking o' a couple emails that arguably strayed into classified subject matter, we could understand clinton's mistake. nevertheless, is tough to claim that none o' the +100 whoopsies that were actual recovered failed to make clinton reflect on the possibility that a private server were a less than ideal option for handling such communications. more than 100 "whoopsies" as it turns out, is disconcerting. for Gromnir, is not a matter o' percentages or volume. +100 opportunities for more enlightened reflection that were ignored by clinton? "whoopsie" indeed. that being said, we suspect it would be prohibitive tough for a prosecutor to prove necessary intent beyond reasonable doubt. clinton and her people had so much time to prepare before the fbi ever began investigating. even if clinton were guilty o' something more sinister than a kinda bumbling disregard for possible dangers related to unsecured email communications, the chances o' finding proof o' such woulda' been reduced to a great degree. *chuckle* our time doing criminal law were limited and now long past, but am recalling a smuggling case that drove us nuts. had a situation with some jackarse royal from a middle-eastern country trying to smuggle endangered species outta the USA. is not as uncommon as you might think. in any event, we had local customs agents inform state department o' their suspicions o' smuggling BEFORE contacting law enforcement. even worse, folks at state contacted the prince BEFORE calling US Attorney's Office or anybody at DoJ. *&$%! by the time law enforcement interviewed the suspected smugglers, the ne'er-do-wells might as well have been reading responses off o' 3x5 cards. *&$% and @#$* and double $%#@. how long did clinton get to prepare her folks? dunno. we weren't expecting anything from the announcement. weren't gonna exonerate and weren't gonna condemn. am thinking we got what we expected. HA! Good Fun!

should probably keep it light, 'cause your history is suspect. http://origins.osu.edu/review/after-abolition-britain-and-slave-trade-1807 britain continued to be involved in slavery long after it passed its anti-slave laws, and it profited from involvement with slavers much, much longer still. HA! Good Fun! ps am not holding up the US as some kinda shining abolitionist beacon... obviously.

speaking from personal experience, speaking of self in third-person makes a person sound crazy. if there is one thing Gromnir knows, it's crazy. HA! Good Fun!