|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Who here has said that? Who here has said anything even remotely close to that? I'd love to see a quote.
1) If you don't like something someone said flag it and move on. If you think a post should have gotten deleted but didn't, did you flag it? If you did, message the people at Paizo, if not, flag it and move on.
2) It is all well and good to say "(Other) People need to stand up for their rights at the risk of their life." Or to try and compare this situation to civil disobedience, but you know what, Rosa Parks didn't have to worry about getting shot half a dozen or more times.
3) Is saying "Comply in order to stay alive" close to saying "They should've complied then they'd still be alive"? Not in my book. When the victim blaming starts, call the people who do it out on it, but don't try and use the slippery slope argument to deny the intelligence behind doing whatever is needed to survive.
4) No where have I said, or implied, that the police shouldn't be responsible for the lives of all involved, or that they shouldn't be held to a higher standard. They most certainly should. However, the truth is, currently, they are not, and unless you want to be a martyr, that should be at the forefront of your thoughts in dealings with them.
I see 2 groups. Group 1 says "the victims shouldn't have to do anything, and saying they should do anything is victim blaming" where as group 2 is more concerned with keeping people alive than they are with deciding who is to blame when people get killed. Group 1 might be "right" but I can't help but think I side more with group 2.
The time to worry about your rights is when you're safe. Until things change significantly, when you're dealing with a cop, worry about not getting shot. (Especially if you're not caucasian.)
That police officers who are hit men can significantly undercost hit men who are not police officers and eventually get a complete monopoly?
First, RAI does not mean rules as you want them to be. Given that it has been given the go ahead by the designers there is absolutely no RAI argument against it.
Second, mystic theurge was a greatly under powered prc in 3.5 without early entry / ur priest, and has remained so into Pathfinder. It is playable with the faq, though not entirely optimal.
Here is an blog post I like. Many police officers buy into the core idea of broken windows, that low level offenses left prosecuted will lead to more low level offenses until they are normalized and higher level offenses become justifiable because it seems like no one cares. If you apply that to police officers though, how can they justify not looking into accusations against other police officers and yet say that lack of investigation into offenses does not lead to higher incidents of offense?
People never want to believe the worst of themselves or their friends. The broken window is for other people, bad people, not Bob who had your back on that scary call last year or George who covered your Christmas shift for you your first christmas as a married man.
If they report as required, show it. That'll help win people over to your side. It really is that easy.
It might seem like it happens a lot,but the truth is, over all it doesn't. There are thousands of cities across the U. S. and many of those with their own police force, not to mention state and national law enforcement agencies, and other random law enforcement agencies (like tribal police). And still, most officers never fire their weapon.
Also, no a policeman's job is not to bring the suspect in alive or die trying, that would be ridiculous. Their job is to serve and protect the public interest. Sometimes that requires violence, but it should never require the officer surrender his life.
Where America falls down is in following up on shootings. Look at the Michael Brown shooting for instance, that might have been a good shooting or it might not have, but the response to it by the police has been horrible. (If the circumstances had been reversed and Brown had shot an officer I bet they damn sure would have gotten crime scene photos, dead batteries not with standing.)
Which isn't to say that the police in America aren't overly violent, especially against minorities, but it isn't a nationwide plot to oppress people, it is a few bad apples who get away with murder because they're buddies with the people who are investigating.
I don't think the clasp is meant to be used against Xykon. A few hp of damage <<<< going swirly eyed and jumping off the edge of the air ship (or something worse).
I'm not sure if you are serious or if you're trolling.
You seem to be under the impression that someone in the middle of a riot can say "Hey, this is my house, leave it alone." and the rioting mob will listen to them. Unfortunately it doesn't work that way.
So what is someone whose house is being looted going to do to stop it? Call the cops? Because that'll goover well and not in any way escalate the situation or bring danger of bodily harm.
The men wanted to acquire two more bombs, the sources said, but could not afford to do it until the Electronic Benefit Transfer card of one suspect’s girlfriend was replenished.
So, so many really bad things to say but I made a will save so all I'll say is that I'm surprised YD didn't consider this state sponsored terrorism.
I would like to read a more un-biased account of this including what happened for a minute or so before the video starts. Not that it will excuse running over random people, but I'd like to have the full story of what was going on.
I will say this, if I'd have been in the vehicle once it came to a stop, I'd have been terrified, and I can totally understand saying let's just get out of here and if they get in the way well they'll move. Its how did they get to the point where they had already run over someone that I want to know more about.
I thought this was a good read. It's various legal minds weighing in on the fairness of the grand jury hearing.
I wonder how many of those legal experts are experts on behalf of the prosecution, and how many of those get paid for their time and expertise, and of those I wonder how many would be afraid to say anything negative about such a sensitive topic for fear of losing a significant source of income. I suspect the answer is non-trivial.
Its saner than to suggest that if violence in response to a failure to prosecute over a police involved shooting exceeds the ten million (9 million for taking a life in payout + 1 million to train a new officer) it costs the state to prosecute its own it becomes more economically efficient to prosecute the officer.
Ok. Where are you getting the figures of a 9 million dollar payout for a death and 1 million to train a police officer? I promise you those are both ridiculously high. After having read several of your posts, I really don't think you fathom how much a million truly is (and not just talking about money, I mean just the number one million).
So at around 98 incidents a year, the expense would need to be a billion dollars a year to the judicial budget. The most prized asset in the judicial economy being the training of an officer, the exchange rate would be ten officers per African American and a thousand a year at the current rate of violence. I believe that the current rate of loss of officers in the line of duty was about ten to fifteen percent of that exchange rate.
And here I think you're just making stuff up.
Do you actually believe this to be true or do you know its false and just hope saying things like it often enough will eventually make it true?
And just to be clear, he didn't lose anything, and this wasn't a case. There's no incentive for him to convince the jury to indict (beyond the whole justice thing but that is so last millenium).
So cops shouldn't whistle blow because it might be dangerous? How is that different from any other part of their job?
I'm sorry, if you apply the law differently based on someone's profession you shouldn't wear the uniform, simple as that.
Both conversations have a time and a place.
Freehold DM wrote:
You don't have to sabotage my space ship just to get to watch Joss Whedon, I'd loan it to you.
Abraham spalding wrote:
And by unduly harsh treatment you mean unconstitutionally bad, bad enough that another government was even asked to intercede on her behalf? And Snowden, who doesn't have another government to plead for him, and who did far more than she did, is an idiot for not turning himself in?
But here's the thing: We find these things out. They are announced by the government for crying out loud. The government literally goes, "This was done and it was wrong and here is how we are going about punishing those that did it, and how we are trying to compensate the victims, even if there can never be full compensation for what they endured."
That has to be the most adorable and naive sentiment I've ever seen.
A lot more than 100 inches. Not that 100 inches isn't horrible, it is definitely far more than is needed to declare a state of emergency, heck, that's 33% more than the average yearly snow fall of Anchorage, Alaska. They're going to have piles of snow that may take a year or more to melt (assuming, of course, that they pile everything they scrape off into huge piles and depending on their temperatures). But it isn't even close to what is needed to form a glacier.
Most people who say improved weapon finesse isn't over powered use "they still don't do as much damage as strength based builds" as their argument. I don't agree with that argument. If you have a dex based build, and improved weapon finesse is an option, it is a must have. You'd be a fool not to take it. Ever. And that, my friends, is over powered.
A Navy veteran in Missouri said he was fired from his job and called a terrorist for posting pictures to Facebook of Homeland Security vehicles massing near Ferguson.
Could be totally innocent that Homeland Security is gathering near Ferguson and could totally be coincidental that the man got fired. Still, worth a read.
Oh good, there weren't enough cops to supress everyone's rights sufficiently good thing the American military is ready to be deployed against American civilians on American citizens.
I believe it is property in general, rather house, car, or the contents of your wallet. I don't know if there is a law like that in ferguson, but I do want the information in the thread.to be accurate.
Ok, technically it is in self defense so long as you have a legal right to be there. Realistically how it goes is that the perp tries to steal something, the victim refuses to surrender it, the perp threatens or commits violence and stand your ground allows the victim to defend themselves with legal safety. (That's my understanding of it at least, I'm no lawyer though.)
On a personal aside, anyone wants to steal $5 from me is welcome to it though, they likely need it much worse than I do.
I'm pretty sure that is incorrect. Florida and Oklahoma, at least, also have stand your ground laws, which include the right to defend your property, rather it be $5 or $5 million.
That's exactly what I'm telling you. I'd much rather buy 500 $1 lottery tickets and hope to hit a few million than buy a single lottery ticket with a 0.00002 chance of winning more money than I can fathom. My quality of life wouldn't differ terribly much between a $20 million lottery and yours.
You aren't smart enough to know that selling 500 million novelty items at $100,000 a piece is impossible, so, do I doubt that you have an IQ of 214 (or even in the triple digits at all)? Yes.
Do I doubt that you believe you are as smart as you claim and believe everything you say? Not a bit.
I have a 214 IQ.
This is the funniest thing I've read in a good, long while. His would make you orders of magnitude smarter than Stephen Hawking and probably the smartest human ever.
Eta: Not the smartest ever, but in the top 5.
And any cop that stands idly by and allows their partner to shoot an unarmed suspect should themselves be arrested as an accessory to murder.
Ya, because "any means necessary" totally won't end in a blood bath. Sadly, police are prepared for an any means necessary" uprising. Better to go over the mayor's head.