Now Obama has had to come out and state the higher ratio of blacks being stopped, arrested and shot. Watching occasional officers being interviewed was a shocking experince on one programme I watched. Even experts in training have had to admit that far too many police in the US have short spans before they want to shoot. patience does not come into it nor honesty. Time after time we see incidients where unarmed people are shot and not just once but several times as the police think they can do what they damn well like. The other night here I came across a programme where a team of police experts from the US were over here and wondered how things operated with a police force not armed in regular duties. But the thing they noticed was how wide and detailed the training was and the bottom line was a baton and in places a taser, perhaps. It surprised them as the average city police force over the pond is too quick to raise things and just damn well gun people down. Too often the gun just comes out too quickly and even when they are basically guilty of killing someone in over 97% of incidents a cop will get away with it.
It has been said that the Dallas Police department is a reasonable one and that may well be factual but in general terms you people over there have a very long and deep problem in your police. Guns come out too quickly and especially when the other person is unarmed. It shows my point is that it is far too quick for someone to get beaten unconscious, choked to death or just plain shot and the police know they will get away with it. With all sorts of military equipment, army vehicles and so on the national impression being given to the world shows Americans have a very long and deep rooted violent policed system.
Tragic and disgraceful is putting it mildly.
In other news, in the UK:
1. The Conservative Party has collapsed and somehow regurgitated Theresa May to be the next PM. No General Election (YAY DEMOCRACY AMIRITE???)
2. The Labour Pary has also collapsed; difference between the Tories and Labour is that Corbyn has agreed to be the constipatory turd to muddle Labour ever further into obscurity, as he refuses to be flushed down the political toilet as he so richly deserves to have done.
3. Lib Dems have gained loads of supporters but for naught, as May will initiate Article 50 ASAP. Poor Lib Dems.
4. Scotland is looking strongly at independence again, with N. Ireland considering joining up with the Republic of Ireland to finally heal Ireland of it's unfortunate divide. All because of the pig fornicator, David Cameron and his jolly band of Tories:
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YBumQHPAeU[/video]
As always, Howie, you get almost all of the facts wrong… But you sure do seem to enjoy your telly! And you prejudices.
Load of side-stepping cobblers from the red neck mentalities of Oakdale and colonel.
The Tories were not in a state of collapse at all but followed the procedure for electing a new Leader - only the Labour Party is a disaster. At no time were the Tories in the left's state. You are either trying to be fly southern boy or American ignorance of factuals here is beyond you. Ulster is British and will stay so and i would remind that the only people wanting Ulster to be in Eire is the Sinn Fein (remember them - well funded by ex-colonists). SF cannot win the NI Assembly not do the majority of people in the Province want to be in with the south and that includes people of a more moderate Irish nationalism or RC) So a load of tripe. The 2 of you did something together that proves what you lot do with a mess in your own country and that is change the subject as it is too near the damn truth;
Your own President (not Oakdale when it comes to correct stats) indicated in a speech this week the truth about police killing and race matters. Too many police forces over there in dangerland are far too quick on dishing out death and get away with it; The after time we see thanks to mobile phones what the police have got away with for decades before they existed. Around 97% of polie who have gunned down someone get away with it. They do not have patience nor common sense and poorly trained. Even situations in other countries that are handled without almost automatically being gunned down show how bad you are over there. They don't like being challenged or contradicted and one has to ask why unarmed people need be pumped with a selection of bullets. It does not take long for the city police forces to get too damn haughty as they think they re beyond reproach and heaven help you if you cross swords with them. Rifles, semi-automatics, armoured army cars and so on what a damnable police state mindset.
Even when i mentioned the retired Philly captain who said there is an inbuilt problem was ignored here a while ago. Arrogance, conceit and acting as if they can do what they like is a national weakness and even allowing for sensible officers the national situation is a country wide disgrace and they act above the law because they have got away with it for far too long. An awful lot of them would not get such a job in sensible countries.
Even situations in other countries that are handled without almost automatically being gunned down show how bad you are over there.
How'd that work out in Paris…? :(
You seem,
RJ, to want police to be
nannies (which is what you were, before you retired…). You'll note, your wishes are no longer being followed: British police are increasingly armed and dangerous! (Just not dangerous to actual bad guys — that would be non-PC, eh? :) )
I understand that you feel you and your "country" are fairly safe, since you are inconsequential — and you'll soon be dead, being as old as you are and having no progeny. That makes me think you're a mean old spiteful man who just has an axe to grind — that he's never explained!
What's your problem,
RJ? (Besides being you…)
The Tories were not in a state of collapse at all but followed the procedure for electing a new Leader - only the Labour Party is a disaster.
Probably both parties will be in state of collapse as the UK disintegrates, huh?
RJ.....thought you'd be gone by now.....guess we're stuck with you....Howie, who would figure that you'd be behind this RJ Classic Post..... :eyes: :lol:
Well, I've been following all these stories, in the real world...not here, or online...simply, I have a close personal friend who was in the thick of it in Dallas......one who will be OK they say.
JFYI....I will not elaborate on that at any time in the future....so don't bother....enough said.
Today, I came across this video that says a lot, so I thought I'd share it with ya'll......
What it says to me is .....take a deep, deep breath & relax.....relax & compose.....until we actually know what happened, & why. Until then do your best to ignore all the race baiting the media will be hyping.....after all it's their job to increase viewership, & attract readers.......as opposed to actually ensuring you get the facts so you can make educated decisions pertaining to the aforementioned drama.
That said.....please watch the posted video, & feel free to spout on.....
after you've actually watched it:[VIDEO]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJPFdS6SSgQ[/VIDEO]
A powerful presentation of a narrative long ago rejected by our "betters": People are responsible for what they do.
Nowadays, it's all politics…
I didn't watch the vid till the end since the subject isn't something I'm really interested in.
Nevertheles there is a very short passage at the begin of the vid that attracted my attention.
It starts around 1:46 and lasts a few seconds. It's about the year 2012(?) and the number of arrests for that year.
Can please a native English speaker (or someone better at English than me) confirm the year and especially the number of arrests for that year?
I'd like to make sure that my ears don't deceive me. ;)
Can please a native English speaker (or someone better at English than me) confirm the year and especially the number of arrests for that year?
Year 2012, just under 12.2 million arrests.
He repeats the number three times in a row, so he likely means it. Americans must think arrest is good for your blood pressure or something.
He does have a point of sorts — the amount of deaths from police shootings in the US isn't quite as bad compared to other civilized societies when you look at it relative to the total number of arrests. It's simply that the total number of arrests is more than six times as high per capita…
Basically his argument can be summarized as, "it's not stupendously horrific, it's merely quite bad indeed."
Year 2012, just under 12.2 million arrests.
Thanks Luxor.
The USA had 2012 a population of 314.1 million.
Among those, 12.2 millions got arrested (some might have been arrested twice). However that's almost 3.9% if we count babies and childrens as well. If we count only adults the percentage is even higher. That's an alarming high number for a wealthy country, the most technological advanced one in the world.
I can't tell if the USA has a police psychology problem or a racial problem. Even if there are such real cases, I don't think that they are relevant.
Looking at these numbers there is a much bigger problem there, namely a social one IMHO.
Nobody gets born with the criminal gene in his/her DNA!
Load of side-stepping cobblers from the red neck mentalities of Oakdale and colonel.
The Tories were not in a state of collapse at all but followed the procedure for electing a new Leader - only the Labour Party is a disaster. At no time were the Tories in the left's state. You are either trying to be fly southern boy or American ignorance of factuals here is beyond you. Ulster is British and will stay so and i would remind that the only people wanting Ulster to be in Eire is the Sinn Fein (remember them - well funded by ex-colonists). SF cannot win the NI Assembly not do the majority of people in the Province want to be in with the south and that includes people of a more moderate Irish nationalism or RC) So a load of tripe. The 2 of you did something together that proves what you lot do with a mess in your own country and that is change the subject as it is too near the damn truth;
Your own President (not Oakdale when it comes to correct stats) indicated in a speech this week the truth about police killing and race matters. Too many police forces over there in dangerland are far too quick on dishing out death and get away with it; The after time we see thanks to mobile phones what the police have got away with for decades before they existed. Around 97% of polie who have gunned down someone get away with it. They do not have patience nor common sense and poorly trained. Even situations in other countries that are handled without almost automatically being gunned down show how bad you are over there. They don't like being challenged or contradicted and one has to ask why unarmed people need be pumped with a selection of bullets. It does not take long for the city police forces to get too damn haughty as they think they re beyond reproach and heaven help you if you cross swords with them. Rifles, semi-automatics, armoured army cars and so on what a damnable police state mindset.
Even when i mentioned the retired Philly captain who said there is an inbuilt problem was ignored here a while ago. Arrogance, conceit and acting as if they can do what they like is a national weakness and even allowing for sensible officers the national situation is a country wide disgrace and they act above the law because they have got away with it for far too long. An awful lot of them would not get such a job in sensible countries.
Thank you once again for your "load of keech", Dr. Howie-Goebbels.
Load of nonsense of course, but as always, an amusing read.
Happy Bastille Day Mr. Howie!
.after you've actually watched it:
At 1:55, the war on drugs is successful?
Alton Sterling was certainly not reaching for a gun. This [/url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdGXhSQvTKc] news report (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdGXhSQvTKc) has multiple videos of the shooting. It doesn't even seem possible for Sterling to have been reaching for a gun. Even the GOP governor of Louisiana is disturbed by this. Maybe this is why the guy in Smiley's video doesn't actually show what happened.
The the Daily Beast (http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/06/new-video-shows-alton-sterling-was-not-holding-a-gun-when-baton-rogue-police-killed-him.html) also has video of the shooting.
“I swear to God if you fucking move!” one of the officers yelled, pointing his gun at Sterling’s chest. “He’s got a gun! Gun!”
Muflahi’s video does not appear to support the officer’s claim that Sterling’s gun represented an active threat: It appears to have been in a pocket and never reached his hand. Instead, the video shows Sterling pinned down, shot twice in the chest, and then shot four more times.
After mortally wounding him, one of the officers removes an object from Sterling’s right pants pocket. (Police during a Wednesday press conference refused to comment on whether Sterling had a gun.)
“Fuck!” one cop yells into his radio. “10-4, 10-4… shots fired! Shots fired!”
Sterling was still alive, the video capturing his left hand moving over a dark pool of blood filling the center of his red T-shirt. When paramedics arrived minutes later, Sterling was dead.
Sterling did have a gun, but was not attempting to pull it on the cops. As I said in the previous post, it doesn't appear that he could have even if he wanted to. Sterling was selling bootleg CDs and DVDs in front of the store. That was misdemeanor, not a death penalty offense.
Firstly to the limited brains across the ocean.
British politics were NOT in collapse. The Conservatives got a new leader may I remind you mental layabouts within days following the PM resignation. Now to the main point that all you Yankee boys and the trainee one south of the Mason-Dixon are doing just what is always done here on this damn forum time after time. You cannot answer what the whole world sees about your police mavericks. You simply ignore the problem that even the President had to admit to and what sheer every weeks statistics show.
The police are far too quick to pull a gun and shoot you and seem to need a whole bunch of bullets. Even on the rare occasions an officer is held 9 times out of 10 will get away with it. It is an even worse situation in that it is a regular thing to get gunned down not just with a bullet but a damnable fusillade of them. Increasingly looking like soldiers it shows how bad the police thing is in the place that boasts about democracy, rights, freedoms, etc. They think they are something special keep a system that allows police to do what they dashed well like as they are supposed to be exercising the law. Don't make me laugh. Too many of them have short mental fuses and quicken things up into bad situations and then draw the gun and pump away even if a person is weapon-less. Intellegence, common-sense? nope they would fit in a mental hospital easily!
A lot of your so-called "police" would not last in a civilised country and that they think they can do what they like because of a uniform is the same mentality as a dictatorship.
True to form none of you can face the hard truth that the world sees all the time happening in the land of the free and home of the brave. Just as well the Nazis didn't win WW2 as they would have been able to incorporarate so many policemen into the SS. You lot cannot face the hard statistics the weekly scenes on television and the comments of your own leadership. That you just get into the routine bodyswerving says more than your limited grey cells allow...... :down:
Pathetic and bodyswervers.
@rjhowie : Hundreds upon thousands upon millions of times, I have posted the facts to you. As you do in much else that doesn't suit your view on things, you totally disregard the facts, type up a paragraph of rambling rubbish about your favorite former colonial outpost, who has now surpassed the crumbling motherland in all aspects, and then proceed to question why we won't directly respond to your so-asserted "facts".
Quite ironic, really, old chap. :sherlock:
Firstly to the limited brains across the ocean.
There is no
secondly to the limited brains this side the ocean. Like myself.
This is discrimination based on limited brains. Limited brains are an human right, so I protest.
Besides, it's against the forum rules.
"Stupid is as stupid does…" :)
(By way of apology for quoting Forrest Gump's mother, I'll re-tell my favorite bon home [yes, intentional…] of hers: "Life is like a box of chocolates: You always know what you're going to get — all the good ones are gone, and the rest have finger-holes poked in 'em!")
Another point that Howie never answered: Why were British police so cowed and ineffectual because of Political Correctness (multi-culti stuff) that they allowed the rapes (…that's rape, RJ, as in little girls being molested in the extreme – you know, sticking it in'em; gotta hurt, eh?) Well, you need waiters, huh?
That shit went on for almost 20 years, you daft liberal dingbat! And, still, you don't care… As long as you've got your National Health and your telly.
I've lost all respect for you.
Rubbish colonel. Never has any Yank or half-Yank (allowing for you-hoo) ever been able to answer the long list and history I have named on Opera or here.
I notice well in this thread the total inability to have an explanation for the way so much of the police force works ovr there as a law unto themselves. Most of them would not get such a job in other places and certainly not here (and don't desperately use that as an excuse to deviate as the American norm here). The number of police abuses is the States is enormous and when I said (twice) that a retired senior officer in a big city had doubts about how they are trained or mental ability to cope that was as usual, ignored. They are impatient and when there is a disagreement between a policeman and a member of the public they do not like the person exercising their right! Impatience slides in quickly then intimidation and not long before an excuse to pull the gun out. In one recoding I watched a white man (change eh) was cycling at night in his suburb with his dog )(lead in the hand on the handlebar) and was stopped by a police car. The officer wanted to know where he was going and then started getting very haughty and refused to say to the man why he was being stopped. Then handcuffed and pushed on the ground and thumped. We have all seen occasions such as the time a whole squad of police battered a back man lying on the ground in Los Angeles and the other black who got choked to death by a team. Plenty of times unarmed people have been battered or shot even when the "culprit" is unarmed.
One could see the point if police batterings or shootings of innocents were rare but they are NOT. In the vast number the police get away with it and the official namby-pamby thing comes out with the police being there "to defend us". What a scandalou attitude and a long tradition grew up here that was the norm long before people had mobile phones (cell phones as I am dealing with ex-colonists). You have too many police officers who automatically think that being in a uniform and abadge they are a world of their own and having traditionally got away with it still at it. The actuality shows that you do have a police problem whether you like it or not and in a land where there are more guns than people hardly surprising that the police have got away with it for so long.
You know you have a problem so why you try to ignore it is beyond sense and would soon finish this thread.
So… You'll be voting for Hillary, or Obama again!?
And you're okay with little girls being raped, because…why? Oh, they can't help it; it's their culture. And your bobbies can't help, because they're PC, if they want to get promoted or even stay on the job. Okay. Got it.
But you focus on your telly's reports of isolated incidents in the U.S.… Once again, I ask you: Why?
Dare you answer…? No; I think not.
Can you not make an attempt to answer the thread challenge as to whyn your police are so damn brutal, kill happy and increasingly militarised? :wait:
Rubbish colonel. Never has any Yank or half-Yank (allowing for you-hoo) ever been able to answer the long list and history I have named on Opera or here.
I notice well in this thread the total inability to have an explanation for the way so much of the police force works ovr there as a law unto themselves. Most of them would not get such a job in other places and certainly not here (and don't desperately use that as an excuse to deviate as the American norm here). The number of police abuses is the States is enormous and when I said (twice) that a retired senior officer in a big city had doubts about how they are trained or mental ability to cope that was as usual, ignored. They are impatient and when there is a disagreement between a policeman and a member of the public they do not like the person exercising their right! Impatience slides in quickly then intimidation and not long before an excuse to pull the gun out. In one recoding I watched a white man (change eh) was cycling at night in his suburb with his dog )(lead in the hand on the handlebar) and was stopped by a police car. The officer wanted to know where he was going and then started getting very haughty and refused to say to the man why he was being stopped. Then handcuffed and pushed on the ground and thumped. We have all seen occasions such as the time a whole squad of police battered a back man lying on the ground in Los Angeles and the other black who got choked to death by a team. Plenty of times unarmed people have been battered or shot even when the "culprit" is unarmed.
One could see the point if police batterings or shootings of innocents were rare but they are NOT. In the vast number the police get away with it and the official namby-pamby thing comes out with the police being there "to defend us". What a scandalou attitude and a long tradition grew up here that was the norm long before people had mobile phones (cell phones as I am dealing with ex-colonists). You have too many police officers who automatically think that being in a uniform and abadge they are a world of their own and having traditionally got away with it still at it. The actuality shows that you do have a police problem whether you like it or not and in a land where there are more guns than people hardly surprising that the police have got away with it for so long.
You know you have a problem so why you try to ignore it is beyond sense and would soon finish this thread.
No, you still remain adamant in moving the goal posts, swerving, etc.
In any case, in this state, we've only had once incident, and it was in Elvis Presley's hometown of Tupelo: Antwan Shumpert was killed by police under strange circumstances. (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/04/us/black-mans-fatal-encounter-with-police-splits-mississippi-city-known-for-harmony.html?_r=0)
The local police here have been quite helpful to me; indeed, had a woman with too many damn kids in her car not pay attention to me, and hit the back end of my car when i was stopped at a red light on Wednesday morning. The police were quite courteous, helpful, and got the report done quickly (damn woman didn't have any insurance).
(damn woman didn't have any insurance)
What happens in that situation?
(damn woman didn't have any insurance)
What happens in that situation?
She is going to be fined $1500 for not having any insurance; the insurance I have on my car covers me in the event that I am hit by an uninsured driver, so they will be paying the $700 in damages, but ultimately, my premium will go up.
so they will be paying the $700 in damages, but ultimately, my premium will go up.
If the accident was not your fault (and so it seems) that would be illegal here. Your premium can not go up.
Here, assurance is mandatory and it exists an assurance fund to pay for when somebody doesn't have assurance. That fund pays and after it will pursuit the not assured driver and arrest his assets to pay the fund for it.
Capitalist things that satisfies the bourgeois soul.
Typical for ex-colonists to try and avoid the truth colonel blimp. It is something you cannot handle at all just like in the past you lot just change the subject because the truth makes you lot look pathetic and you are keeping that tradition alive. You have a national police problem so try facing the truth then go back into the jingoistic blank mindset.
Here, assurance is mandatory and it exists an assurance fund to pay for when somebody doesn't have assurance. That fund pays and after it will pursuit the not assured driver and arrest his assets to pay the fund for it.
That's a wonderful theory! In point of fact, it's the regular taxpayers that fork out the dough… The "poor" illegals haven't the money.
Here in California -where I've resided for nigh-onto 35 years- automobile insurance has been compulsory for a long time. And "un-insured motirist" coverage is extra — because there are so many of them that both the state and the insurance companies they collude with actually make a profit on ostensibly illegal behavior, it is
always recommended!
When criminality is supported by the government, lots of people (and companies) make money… (The European "model," you know! :)
It's just the average joe who pays the freight.)
That's a wonderful theory! In point of fact, it's the regular taxpayers that fork out the dough... The "poor" illegals haven't the money.
Here in California -where I've resided for nigh-onto 35 years- automobile insurance has been compulsory for a long time. And "un-insured motirist" coverage is extra -- because there are so many of them that both the state and the insurance companies they collude with actually make a profit on ostensibly illegal behavior, it is always recommended!
Americans have the talent to fail to see the principle. Or if they see it, they make sure to sidestep it.
In European compulsory car insurance, your insurance fee does not depend on what kind of accident you have (as long as you don't cause it) and with whom. It only depends on what kind of car you have, big or small. If an uninsured person causes a traffic accident, the fund that Belfrager mentioned will be used to pay up for those who suffered. And the criminal record of the uninsured person gets updated.
Edit: The point is that there's no un-insured motorist coverage extra in insurance fees here, and cannot be as a matter of principle. There are the same fees for all, and if you fail to participate in the insurance fee system, then you better don't drive. If you do it anyway, i.e. if you go into traffic as un-insured motorist, you will add to your criminal record. Legal motorists don't have to pay any extras because of that. /edit
This is practice, not theory. You evidently don't know the difference between the two.
Yeah, I'm with
@ersi. There's nothing "European" about the model described above. It sounds fundamentally American.
@esi & Frnzie: I know well the difference between theory and practice. It's the case here, in California (and many other states), that the theory is much as you've described; but the practice is as I've described.
I suspect it is much the same in Europe — but that you'd rather not admit it… As with all insurance, the risk is spread out over who "buys" insurance. And where insurance is compulsory that's everyone who "pays". Since you can't get blood from a stone (or turnip), those who can't or won't pay don't. (Do they go to jail? Are their cars confiscated? What do they care? A "free" vacation and the loss of a vehicle that likely cost them less than $200… They're prone to criminal behavior, anyway, aren't they? Why would they change? They're parasites, true; but you accept them as such and shrug your shoulders… What can you do, eh? :) )
If you don't think it affects your rates, you're naive or delusional…
(Do they go to jail? Are their cars confiscated? What do they care? A "free" vacation and the loss of a vehicle that likely cost them less than $200… They're prone to criminal behavior, anyway, aren't they? Why would they change? They're parasites, true; but you accept them as such and shrug your shoulders… What can you do, eh? :) )
And what can
you do? You, as a free American, can save up by not buying insurance while driving ever more worry-free. This is what you mean, right?
If you don't think it affects your rates, you're naive or delusional…
Again, everybody has the same rates. You can affect them over your driving career by causing (or not causing) traffic accidents. Whereas the way Colonel describes it: Accidents happen, rates go up. There's a difference here that you are missing.
And what can you do? You, as a free American, can save up by not buying insurance while driving ever more worry-free. This is what you mean, right?
Well, actually, I had to buy full coverage before auto insurance became compulsory in California… (I bought -and financed!- a new car! A voluntary contractual agreement — you've heard of such?) Before then, I hadn't bought auto insurance — as you surmised. I've now been driving for more than 40 years and have yet to have an "accident"…
I'm sure you think I'm just lucky.
The difference you think I'm missing is that compulsory insurance is a racket promoted by the government. Or the government is a racket, and compulsory insurance is just a subsidiary enterprise! :)
And, of course, you can see no other way of doing things outside of government control.
(This is a persistent and strong strain of the American character,
ersi! Note
Sang's ire at quite reasonable limitations of the sale of spirits! :) )
So-called "soft power" is none the less power…
The difference you think I'm missing is that compulsory insurance is a racket promoted by the government. Or the government is a racket, and compulsory insurance is just a subsidiary enterprise! :)
To call the social contract a racket is a bit of a stretch. The racket part is that the government will take action against you, sure, but in your typical racketeering scheme the government would be causing car crashes in the first place.
In any case, the comparison to alcohol (and drugs) seems unwarranted. It's the difference between something which primarily harms yourself, albeit that will have an indirect negative effect on society as a whole, and something that harms others directly, like cars and guns. "I have the freedom to harm myself" is a value of sorts of Western society. "I have the freedom to harm others," however, is something typically associated with theocratic, fascist or totalitarian regimes.
The racket part is that the government will take action against you, sure, but in your typical racketeering scheme the government would be causing car crashes in the first place.
In fact, Oakdale seems to be hinting that car crashes and uninsured motorists are government's (and insurance companies') fault, in phrases like
- "both the state and the insurance companies [...] make a profit on ostensibly illegal behavior"
- "When criminality is supported by the government, lots of people (and companies) make money..."
It's never clear what his gripe is. Does he have a problem with criminality? Looks like it, but what is the specific crime in question? Or is it the fact that somebody else than him is making a profit? Looks like that also, but he is yet to show that government is indeed making a profit in the manner he insinuates and that he personally has a better system on offer.
Anyway, it's always clear that, in his reasoning, government is evil, except when it's US government operating elsewhere than US. Why would that be? It just is, I guess.
Still pining for the benevolent Soviet, I see, ersi. Good times not forgotten, eh? :) "Whatever is not forbidden is compulsory!" That's the only rational arrangement…
That's a wonderful theory!
Thanks for ersi and frenzie for waisting their time trying to explain the basics of civilization to the North Americans "market" slaves.
They don't learn, but I admire your missionary patience.
Thanks to states like Portugal, for showing us the inevitable result of pseudo-intellectual governance! :) Eventually, you'll just cry for someone to change your nappies… Poor ex-colonists.
Thanks to states like Portugal, for showing us the inevitable result of pseudo-intellectual governance! :) Eventually, you'll just cry for someone to change your nappies… Poor ex-colonists.
Ridiculous, simply ridiculous.
I understand, you can be nothing but the "American World Champion" of ridiculousness.
Do you have some spare 500.000 euros? (sorry, we don't accept dollars) You can get a Portuguese Green Card and become an European citizen. Lots of Chinese are doing it. :)
That must solve all your intellectual hallucination.
Well, now it's the interesting part. My insurance agent and I both agree that 2 1/2 weeks is enough time for her to find $688.91.
She is an an assistant manager at the Wal-Mart of the town where she rear-ended me, so she has some money, in any case.
It only depends on what kind of car you have, big or small. If an uninsured person causes a traffic accident, the fund that Belfrager mentioned will be used to pay up for those who suffered. And the criminal record of the uninsured person gets updated.
This sounds a little silly. So if you have a big car and cause a fender bender, you'll get a bigger fine even though in the small accident cause probably caused the same amount of damage as a small car? WTF? How about actually getting the repair estimates to find out? Even that fund isn't free. How much of your taxpayer money pays into it? It's not that I don't understand the reasoning. If I get hit and injured by a person that doesn't have insurance because he can't afford it, I can sue all I want not still not be able to squeeze blood from a stone.
She is an an assistant manager at the Wal-Mart of the town where she rear-ended me, so she has some money, in any case.
In your cause though, she should have had insurance obviously. LV is a metro area of 2 million and I only pay $134 a month for comprehensive coverage.
This sounds a little silly. So if you have a big car and cause a fender bender, you'll get a bigger fine even though in the small accident cause probably caused the same amount of damage as a small car? WTF?
I'm not really sure what you're talking about. In the preceding sentence (the one you didn't quote :P) @ersi explicitly said he was talking about your insurance fee. It depends on factors like your age, your marital state, what the car is used for, the car's age, the kilometers on it, the type of car (or in ersi's words, its size), how long you've had your license, etc. Your fee doesn't go up because of an accident you
didn't cause (except in the sense that it might indirectly raise everyone's fee by a few cents), which is what
@Colonel Rebel seemed to be saying. That any accident affects your fee regardless who's at fault.
How about actually getting the repair estimates to find out?
The money that gets paid to the sufferer (as opposed to the causer of the accident) is strictly based on the repair costs. The whole idea in making the system compulsory is that there be a fast glitchless process to pay it out, so the sufferer can repair/replace the car/health and go on with life. If the causer is un-insured, the money will be paid out from the fund, and the causer will have to refund the fund. If the causer fails to refund the fund, he is demonstrating his financial lack of viability, in addition to his crime of having not acquired the insurance in the first place.
Even that fund isn't free. How much of your taxpayer money pays into it? It's not that I don't understand the reasoning. If I get hit and injured by a person that doesn't have insurance because he can't afford it, I can sue all I want not still not be able to squeeze blood from a stone.
It's blatantly obvious that you don't understand the reasoning. Otherwise you would not have these questions. The fund is funded by a part of the ordinary compulsory insurance fees. Non-driving tax-payers are not participating in it.
The fund is funded by a part of the ordinary compulsory insurance fees.
Now this whole thing is making more sense. When I signed up up for insurance, I was asked if wanted non-insured drivers coverage in case some idiot without insurance hit me. So, in Europe this isn't optional and everybody has it.
And again yet another pointless shooting by police on an unarmed man. The report showed a health worker trying to deal with an Austic man on the street and the police arrived so the worker lay down with his hands in the air and obviously asked not to be shot and what did the damn police do? Shot the helper in the leg. The uniformed and brainless thugs are keeping the arrogant tradition well and truly alive. Doubt if it will change much as the arrogance is so built in and easy to get away with.
It gets more indefensible by the day. The police story is that they got a call about a man in the street with a gun an threatening suicide. But when they got there, the autistic man was in the street playing with toy trucks and as Howie said, the healthcare worker was trying to help him. Here's a link to an article about it (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/07/21/fla-police-shoot-black-man-with-his-hands-up-as-he-tries-to-help-autistic-patient/)
According to Kinsey, the officer who fired the shots seemed confused by what happened. “‘Sir, why did you shoot me?'” Kinsey recalled asking the officer. “He said, ‘I don’t know.'”
After the "peace" officer shot Kinsey, the healthcare worker was left handcuffed and bleeding for about twenty minutes.
During a news conference later on Thursday, John Rivera, president of the Miami-Dade County Police Benevolent Association, called the shooting an accident.
“Sometimes police officers make mistakes,” Rivera said. “They are not computers. They are not robots. They are God’s creation.”
Of course, officers aren't robots but shooting a healthcare worker with his hands up three times is not an accident. One of commentators at the Post gave the excuse that it was split second decision. It only takes a split second to determine that a toy truck is not a gun.
This cop needs to go to prison.
How can you determine that, Sang, before your know whether the cop was black or white or gay or straight? :(
But considering the wonderful examples of affirmative action lowering of standards we all know about, I'd say it's your fault: You want more unqualified applicants to be accepted.
What did you think would happen?
BTW: How many of the (black) cops in the Baltimore "paddy wagon" incident have been convicted? How many do think should have been?
The fund is funded by a part of the ordinary compulsory insurance fees.
Now this whole thing is making more sense. When I signed up up for insurance, I was asked if wanted non-insured drivers coverage in case some idiot without insurance hit me. So, in Europe this isn't optional and everybody has it.
That's right. Where I live, it's called compulsory traffic insurance and this is exactly what it means - traffic insurance. If you are not insured against non-insured idiots in traffic, then it's not traffic insurance in the relevant sense. The insurance goes via insurance companies. To make more money, the insurance companies may come up with more stuff to cover in the insurance, but they are not allowed to cover less. "Compulsory" means there are certain minimal requirements compulsory for the insurance companies too.
How can you determine that, Sang, before your know whether the cop was black or white or gay or straight?
Because it's irrelevant. How would you know the cop was let into the force because of affirmative action? Oh I get it. You're trolling me because you think I'm in favor of affirmative action, despite the numerous times I said hiring and firing should be based on merit and things such as race/ethnicity and sexual orientation should actually be irrelevant. Still not the arch-liberal you want me to be, so I apologize for that inconvenience.
It is rather head shaking for a police spokesman to say that latest shooting was a mistake. It is sadly such an inherent state of affairs that has in practice went on so long that too many officers think they can do what they like and in all honesty those that are held responsible for being ignorant, stupid or just crassly arrogant are such a tiny minority. There is unfortunately a very deep running problem covering not just training but the mindset of too many who once in a uniform and armed know they will get away with anything. This particular routine incident is yakked as a "mistake" even though the therapist was lying on the ground with arms in the air and calling out ? The retired captain I have referred to was so correct when he queried the thinking of too many in police forces. It is a sad tradition but more than that it is a definitive failing of what they are meant to be.
If there is not a very deep revolution in policing then people are not going to be very confident, helpful or trusting and that is terrible.
What you never mention, Howie, is the level of crime that's acceptable… Which is why I keep bringing up Rotherham (http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-28934963).
You seem to prefer both your citizens and your police be neutered, while your criminals are given free rein. (Another question, RJ: You like to walk; so do I. I've always enjoyed walking through neighborhoods -as well as the countryside. Do you walk through Pollokshields and Govanhill? If not, ask yourself why…)
And who guards the Guardians? asked the Romans.
Course that was too much advanced to Americans. Two thousand years later they don't still realize it....
It is rather head shaking for a police spokesman to say that latest shooting was a mistake. I
More on this (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article91406042.html)
They tried to say the SWAT time meant to shot the autistic man but hit Kinsey instead, as if that's any better. But how can a supposedly trained SWAT team member miss his target and actually hit the wrong person from so close? If that incredible story is true, then why did the police handcuff KInsey and leave him bleeding in the street for twenty minutes?
Police Commander Emile Hollant is suspended for giving "conflicting statements" about the matter in an attempt to cover his tracks.
This part is strange:
A separate internal affairs investigation into Aledda focused on a man’s claim that the officer used too much force during a robbery investigation. Though the man turned out to be a victim of that crime, Aledda was cleared of any misconduct.
Aledda is the officer that shot Kinsey. What the hell, he used excessive force against the victim of the robbery?
Oakdale you are just being directly stupid. I have been doing projects in my train and tram simulator stuff and i know Pollokshields and Govanhill very well over on the southside of my city. They are nothing like what goes on over in gunland across the Atlantic. You keep rabbiting on about that place in England which is no comparision to the killings going on in your homeland nor the fact there are 2.3 million in jails. We do NOT need a static armed police and we are happy with that but then ours are better trained than what passes for the sem-military style policing going on over the pond. Now onto to someone a bit more normal, midnight raccoon.
That was an interesting point midnight to inform us on and you are right to wonder how a SWAT situation which was as you know so very close yet could not get the Autistic man but bullet the helper instead. And anyway the Autistic bloke would have been easy to have dealt with as he was just sitting on the roadway surely without shooting! I am glad to hear that the police chief has been suspended and that IS good news so thanks for that info. The general traditional police world has a terrible history and modern phones are only catching up with what the uniformed bully or killers have got away with for too long. It is in fact a sad thing as well as being morally wrong and we can only live on hope. :worried:
And anyway the Autistic bloke would have been easy to have dealt with as he was just sitting on the roadway surely without shooting!
Shoot first and ask later. An entire society fits inside a series B western lousy book.
Spot on.