Politics And Current Events

Postby **MrKennethTKangaroo** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 1:35 pm

That road isn't open probably because it doesn't go anywhere of note.

Also, just to give a rough idea of how much space amazon needs...supposedly they are going to start with 1 million square feet. 5th avenue place is 750,000 square feet and US steel tower is about 2.3 million square feet. So amazon is looking for a lot of room.

Postby **columbia** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:15 pm

Rush told me that wiretapping Manafort is bigger than Watergate.

Postby **dodint** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:28 pm

It would be interesting to see an entire police force with only non-lethal weaponry. Would make for an interesting study. Running around shooting beanbags and rubber bullets and tasering bros all day.
There are police forces in the world that do not carry firearms/the majority of police officers do not carry firearms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... a4cef807f5

I meant in a real country.

Seriously though, my 'experiment' really only plays out in the most gun populous country in the world. It wouldn't be nearly as significant literally anywhere else.

Postby **Dickie Dunn** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 2:59 pm

Another earthquake hits Mexico. Today is the 32nd anniversary of the 8.0 earthquake that destroyed Mexico City. That one was just off the coast of Michoacán in the Pacific Ocean. This one has been reported as anywhere from 6.8 to 7.4 with an epicenter in Puebla, about 100 miles southeast of Mexico City. No word yet on the amount of damage, but it's not good. Building near where my wife's cousin works collapsed. Other family reports of swaying skyscrapers and the like.

https://twitter.com/jorge_guajardo/stat ... 3203465217

Edit: More tweets

Postby **obhave** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:44 pm

It would be interesting to see an entire police force with only non-lethal weaponry. Would make for an interesting study. Running around shooting beanbags and rubber bullets and tasering bros all day.
There are police forces in the world that do not carry firearms/the majority of police officers do not carry firearms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... a4cef807f5
And now the British are getting blown up every other week.

This seems to be quite a leap.

Postby **obhave** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:50 pm

It would be interesting to see an entire police force with only non-lethal weaponry. Would make for an interesting study. Running around shooting beanbags and rubber bullets and tasering bros all day.
There are police forces in the world that do not carry firearms/the majority of police officers do not carry firearms.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wor ... a4cef807f5
I meant in a real country.

Seriously though, my 'experiment' really only plays out in the most gun populous country in the world. It wouldn't be nearly as significant literally anywhere else.

I wasn't making an argument for gun free police here (although, it would make me very happy since I am in general not a "gun friendly" individual). Just pointing out that some countries already have that.

Since they are always going to carry guns, I wonder if the "lethal shot" rule for police officers could be modified. Such as doing warning shots, doing no-lethal shots, etc. The whole point of the "only shot to kill" rule is to try and prevent police officers from firing their weapons, but I don't think that it works.

Postby **tifosi77** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:02 pm

Trying to shoot someone who might be flailing around or running in the leg is a surefire way to end up shooting someone else. The rationale for the 'kill shot' is two-fold: One, you really don't want to add a layer of complexity to the decision tree in a high-stress situation like this. Make it binary: Is the suspect an imminent threat to my life, or the life of someone else? Two, the torso is center-mass; it's the biggest target a human presents, so by aiming there you are increasing the chances of hitting the bad guy and minimizing the chances that you are hitting anyone else. The inescapable side-effect of that, of course, is that center-mass is where all the vital bits are, so a hit there is more likely to cause fatal injury.

Postby **Dickie Dunn** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:03 pm

John Kelly enjoyed Trump's UN speech:

Postby **obhave** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:08 pm

Trying to shoot someone who might be flailing around or running in the leg is a surefire way to end up shooting someone else. The rationale for the 'kill shot' is two-fold: One, you really don't want to add a layer of complexity to the decision tree in a high-stress situation like this. Make it binary: Is the suspect an imminent threat to my life, or the life of someone else? Two, the torso is center-mass; it's the biggest target a human presents, so by aiming there you are increasing the chances of hitting the bad guy and minimizing the chances that you are hitting anyone else. The inescapable side-effect of that, of course, is that center-mass is where all the vital bits are, so a hit there is more likely to cause fatal injury.

So improve training to try and make some police officers less trigger happy? Add a warning shot before shooting? Use a taser? I don't know, I feel like there are alternatives to having the shoot only to kill rule. Teach better deescalation skills to cops?

Postby **AuthorTony** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 4:20 pm

So improve training to try and make some police officers less trigger happy? Add a warning shot before shooting? Use a taser? I don't know, I feel like there are alternatives to having the shoot only to kill rule. Teach better deescalation skills to cops?

Unless there are repercussions for trigger happy cops, many will continue to have the "shoot first" instinct. I like dodint's idea of netting suspects who aren't brandishing a firearm. You can't tell me, with modern technology, someone can't come up with a better way to subdue/incapacitate a person (or animal) other than trying to kill them.

Postby **tifosi77** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:12 pm

I completely agree with the need for improved deescalation training. How many officer-involved-shootings are there where the cop that pulls the trigger is on like a level 9 or 10 when the situation requires maybe a 5? Between that and what are in many cases overly-lenient shoot policies, there are just no real consequences for most cops in incidents that are plainly wrong.

Postby **NAN** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:15 pm

Trying to shoot someone who might be flailing around or running in the leg is a surefire way to end up shooting someone else. The rationale for the 'kill shot' is two-fold: One, you really don't want to add a layer of complexity to the decision tree in a high-stress situation like this. Make it binary: Is the suspect an imminent threat to my life, or the life of someone else? Two, the torso is center-mass; it's the biggest target a human presents, so by aiming there you are increasing the chances of hitting the bad guy and minimizing the chances that you are hitting anyone else. The inescapable side-effect of that, of course, is that center-mass is where all the vital bits are, so a hit there is more likely to cause fatal injury.
So improve training to try and make some police officers less trigger happy? Add a warning shot before shooting? Use a taser? I don't know, I feel like there are alternatives to having the shoot only to kill rule. Teach better deescalation skills to cops?

Much easier said than done.

Postby **Viva la Ben** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 5:50 pm

Those high-rises swaying in Mexico :barf:

Postby **count2infinity** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:45 pm

"Losers are more likely to believe in conspiracy theories, study finds"

http://www.psypost.org/2017/09/losers-l ... inds-49694

Well, duh...

Postby **columbia** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:46 pm

Trump authored that?

Postby **tifosi77** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:50 pm

LATAM attorney who's office is across from my desk is from Puebla, where the quake was apparently epicentered, and his mom lives in MX City. Took a few hours, but he was able to establish contact that she's okay. People have been posting videos of buildings collapsing hours after the thing hit.

Postby **Gaucho** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:52 pm

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/910273614573862912

Postby **columbia** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:55 pm

I've only been in a baby quake and I figured the hotel was going to Einstürzende.

Postby **Freddy Rumsen** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 6:56 pm

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/ ... 1400292352

Postby **columbia** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:00 pm

Allowing Pelosi to remain in power and appointing that clown as DNC chair: they deserve what they get.

Postby **Viva la Ben** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:17 pm

The RNC needs moar money for legal fees.
https://twitter.com/JDiamond1/status/910253992407597059

Postby **Viva la Ben** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:18 pm

Trump claims a net worth of ~10 billion.

Postby **columbia** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:18 pm

Sekulow will give all of that away in the name of Jesus.

Postby **Freddy Rumsen** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:20 pm

According to the story the legal bills are unrelated to fundraising.

The President's legal bills were covered through the RNC's legal defense fund -- not its political coffers -- which the RNC official said was established in 2014 to cover legal fees associated with election-related litigation.

Postby **Viva la Ben** » Tue Sep 19, 2017 7:23 pm

How exactly does the RNC generate revenue?