"In no program that I have ever heard of does someone patrol with a gun in their pocket," Carmen Caldwell, the Executive Director of Citizens' Crime Watch of Miami-Dade, told theGrio.
I suppose the well-informed Mr. Caldwell has never heard of a concealed carry weapons permit.
Then you have the fact that the 911 operator specifically told him not to follow the subject. Yet you can hear him continue to follow on the audio.
If anything, the 911 operator suggested that he not follow the subject ("we don't need you to do that").
And why should he not? Well, because the subject might be dangerous, obviously!! And the cops didn't want to come to the scene only to find him dead or severely injured. But Zimm wasn't too worried about this, since he had a concealed weapon, which was his legal right to carry...
So fucking what if he was in his motor vehicle? I don't have to cower in the safety of my motor vehicle, and he didn't either.
The only reason the 911 operator asked if Zimmerman was following Martin was because he sounded OUT OF BREATH. He was not in his vehicle, he was pursuing on foot.
And she didn't tell him to stop pursuing. She said he didn't "need" to do that.
Also, Zimmerman was carrying a concealed weapon, which he had the legal right to do because he has a concealed carry permit. There is no reason to believe that he had his gun out when he was pursuing Martin. (If that had been the case, I imagine Martin WOULD have dialed 911 rather than starting an altercation with Z.)
No, you're a thug for thinking that someone else's "self-appointed vigilante's authority" warrants YOUR OWN self-appointed vigilante actions.
I.O.W., if Martin had any reasonable reason to think that Zimmerman had anything against him, he should have called 911 instead of starting an altercation.
There is no such thing as "injuries severe enough to justify lethal force". If someone has reasonable cause to fear for their safety, if you injure them at all, they are justified in using any and all available force to stop you from injuring them further. Period.
Don't like it? Don't start fights you can't win. And since concealed carry is legal (and Zimmerman had a CCW permit, by the way), you have no way of knowing whether someone has a concealed weapon. So, the moral of the story: don't start fights.
The bit about ginger content gives it away, IMO. We all know that ginger ale technically has a little ginger flavor. He thinks it's terribly bland, and said so rather dramatically.
And, like I said, typical ginger ale is pretty bland. I've had some spicy ginger ales, but Canada Dry is basically Sprite with a negligible amount of ginger flavor.
The Wikipedia entry doesn't differentiate between carbonated water, club soda, soda water, sparkling water, seltzer, or "fizzy water". I assume the composition will depend on the brand name you're buying.
(Tonic water, by contrast, is not the same: it contains quinine.)
I read it as an opinion which had been rather blatantly exaggerated for humorous effect. He thinks ginger ale is bland.
Replying with "no, it actually has a flavor" just makes it look like you missed the joke. He knows it has a flavor; he just doesn't think it has much of one.
If you re-read GP's comment, you'll find that he didn't say Newark to San Fran was 19 hours by sea. He said it was the longest voyage you could make on an oceangoing vessel, just as Newark to Singapore is the longest flight you can make on commercial airlines.
You're correct. The recommended daily intake of sodium is 2300 mg (2.3 grams). 1.5g is about 65% of that. Unless you are on a low-sodium diet, it is not completely outrageous for a single meal on a rare occasion, so long as you typically watch the amount of salt you'd consume in your other meals. The problem is that nobody does. Typical salt intake is ~5 grams per day.
Also, you'd not necessarily be correct about club soda having no (added) flavor. It often has an alkaline salt added to it to offset the acidity (and the accompanying slightly-sour taste) of the carbonation. While it's not exactly a flavoring agent (other than its saltiness), it's added to improve the flavor.
Side note: I have had ginger ale which had plenty of flavor - and even that actually tasted like ginger. Try finding it in a health food store. Of course it'll be more expensive, but you'd expect to pay more for something that tastes better, right?
But breathing and perspiring are net losses in hydration. His point was that most people won't be drinking enough soda to keep up with their normal water requirements, and if they did, they'd be getting way too much sugar along with it.
It actually is not your right. You must obey all commands given you by the pilot in command. It is a federal offense not to, and you can get jail time for disregarding captain's orders.
Yes, yes, I know all of that, but if the captain ordered all of the passengers to drink their in-flight beverage with a soup spoon because he's a sadistic prick, or required everyone to meditate for 15 minutes prior to take off because of some hocus-pocus about calming their brainwaves so they wouldn't interfere with the plane's electronics, for damn sure I'd refuse if I could find any way get away with not doing it.
I may not be making any calls, and I'll put it into airplane mode so it won't drain the battery in a futile attempt to find a signal, but the phone stays on.
or face the consequences
Ah ha. See, there is the alternative. If it looks like I'm getting kicked off the plane if my phone isn't off, it'll go off. But how is anyone going to know it's not off? I'll take my chances.
And it is my right, as a passenger, to disregard your tinfoil hattery and use my damn device whenever and however I want.
Seriously, you might as well demand that everyone wear a tinfoil hat. It wouldn't be any more or less helpful.
In case you missed the point, you're a fucking idiot. If a fucking cellphone could take down your jet, I wouldn't want to fly on it anyway. You're a shitty pilot and you're blaming it on my cellphone.
If I ever get on a flight where these rules are laid out, then (realizing that you are my pilot) I think I will demand to be let off the plane and rescheduled for a flight with a pilot who is confident that nobody will die and no flights will crash because someone had to take a call.
Admirable that you did some research, but if you were a little more astute you might have noticed that the article cites the source as a Facebook photo - which happens to be public, if you search for her name on Facebook.
(And if that's not large enough, you can download the higher-resolution original, from the option in the gear menu.)
"That" look is not in the least bit anorexic, and if you think it is, perhaps you need to lay off the fritos for awhile.
She is not unrealistically thin, and you'd be doing yourself a favor by trying to look like that. Yes, there are some models who truly are unrealistically thin and set unrealistic standards of beauty. She is not one of them.
[if someone bombed the oil platforms,] that "someone" would be a terrorist.
Now you're talking about "OUR" opponent and "OUR" aggression.
Iran may not be a threat to "us" (I assume you mean the United States) but that doesn't mean it's not a credible threat to other countries in that region of the world.
If "someone" bombed Iran's oil platforms, it would probably be one of the countries who consider Iran (and the Iranian nuclear program) a threat, e.g. Israel. And it would be an act of war, not terrorism.
Bullshit. Oil platforms and fuel reserves are perfectly valid targets. Ironically enough, almost all of the US's fuel reserves in the pacific conflict were stored mere miles from Pearl Harbor; if the Japanese had thought of targeting that rather than blowing easily-repaired holes in the hulls of our fleet, we'd have figuratively been sunk - it'd have been infinitely more effective than sinking actual ships. Learn from history, or repeat it: pick one.
Recall the saying "all's fair in love and war". If you're going to do a war, at least do it properly. You don't attack your opponent's fists; if you want to end the conflict, you go for the jugular.
Or the saying "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs" - it is NOT referring to "collateral" damage. The eggs are the entire fucking target; you unapologetically destroy them.
Slashdot Mirror
"In no program that I have ever heard of does someone patrol with a gun in their pocket," Carmen Caldwell, the Executive Director of Citizens' Crime Watch of Miami-Dade, told theGrio.
I suppose the well-informed Mr. Caldwell has never heard of a concealed carry weapons permit.
Then you have the fact that the 911 operator specifically told him not to follow the subject. Yet you can hear him continue to follow on the audio.
If anything, the 911 operator suggested that he not follow the subject ("we don't need you to do that").
And why should he not? Well, because the subject might be dangerous, obviously!! And the cops didn't want to come to the scene only to find him dead or severely injured. But Zimm wasn't too worried about this, since he had a concealed weapon, which was his legal right to carry...
ARE YOU A FUCKING MORON?
So fucking what if he was in his motor vehicle? I don't have to cower in the safety of my motor vehicle, and he didn't either.
The only reason the 911 operator asked if Zimmerman was following Martin was because he sounded OUT OF BREATH. He was not in his vehicle, he was pursuing on foot.
And she didn't tell him to stop pursuing. She said he didn't "need" to do that.
Also, Zimmerman was carrying a concealed weapon, which he had the legal right to do because he has a concealed carry permit. There is no reason to believe that he had his gun out when he was pursuing Martin. (If that had been the case, I imagine Martin WOULD have dialed 911 rather than starting an altercation with Z.)
No, you're a thug for thinking that someone else's "self-appointed vigilante's authority" warrants YOUR OWN self-appointed vigilante actions.
I.O.W., if Martin had any reasonable reason to think that Zimmerman had anything against him, he should have called 911 instead of starting an altercation.
You know what? I'm not playing this game.
There is no such thing as "injuries severe enough to justify lethal force". If someone has reasonable cause to fear for their safety, if you injure them at all, they are justified in using any and all available force to stop you from injuring them further. Period.
Don't like it? Don't start fights you can't win. And since concealed carry is legal (and Zimmerman had a CCW permit, by the way), you have no way of knowing whether someone has a concealed weapon. So, the moral of the story: don't start fights.
The bit about ginger content gives it away, IMO. We all know that ginger ale technically has a little ginger flavor. He thinks it's terribly bland, and said so rather dramatically.
And, like I said, typical ginger ale is pretty bland. I've had some spicy ginger ales, but Canada Dry is basically Sprite with a negligible amount of ginger flavor.
The Wikipedia entry doesn't differentiate between carbonated water, club soda, soda water, sparkling water, seltzer, or "fizzy water". I assume the composition will depend on the brand name you're buying.
(Tonic water, by contrast, is not the same: it contains quinine.)
I read it as an opinion which had been rather blatantly exaggerated for humorous effect. He thinks ginger ale is bland.
Replying with "no, it actually has a flavor" just makes it look like you missed the joke. He knows it has a flavor; he just doesn't think it has much of one.
You still what you pay for.
I hope you were going for irony.
If you re-read GP's comment, you'll find that he didn't say Newark to San Fran was 19 hours by sea. He said it was the longest voyage you could make on an oceangoing vessel, just as Newark to Singapore is the longest flight you can make on commercial airlines.
You're correct. The recommended daily intake of sodium is 2300 mg (2.3 grams). 1.5g is about 65% of that. Unless you are on a low-sodium diet, it is not completely outrageous for a single meal on a rare occasion, so long as you typically watch the amount of salt you'd consume in your other meals. The problem is that nobody does. Typical salt intake is ~5 grams per day.
Also, you'd not necessarily be correct about club soda having no (added) flavor. It often has an alkaline salt added to it to offset the acidity (and the accompanying slightly-sour taste) of the carbonation. While it's not exactly a flavoring agent (other than its saltiness), it's added to improve the flavor.
Um, whoosh?
Side note: I have had ginger ale which had plenty of flavor - and even that actually tasted like ginger. Try finding it in a health food store. Of course it'll be more expensive, but you'd expect to pay more for something that tastes better, right?
If Google wasn't fucking retarded and hiding the link behind a counter/redirect, maybe that wouldn't be a problem.
Personally, I'd be happy if he could figure out how to use <a> tags.
But breathing and perspiring are net losses in hydration. His point was that most people won't be drinking enough soda to keep up with their normal water requirements, and if they did, they'd be getting way too much sugar along with it.
You got dehydrated in a hour? Who are you, Sponge Bob Squarepants?
No, he's the jellomizer. Have you never seen how much water jello mix sucks up?
"Alot":
Word not found.
Did you mean:
allot
a lot
It actually is not your right. You must obey all commands given you by the pilot in command. It is a federal offense not to, and you can get jail time for disregarding captain's orders.
Yes, yes, I know all of that, but if the captain ordered all of the passengers to drink their in-flight beverage with a soup spoon because he's a sadistic prick, or required everyone to meditate for 15 minutes prior to take off because of some hocus-pocus about calming their brainwaves so they wouldn't interfere with the plane's electronics, for damn sure I'd refuse if I could find any way get away with not doing it.
I may not be making any calls, and I'll put it into airplane mode so it won't drain the battery in a futile attempt to find a signal, but the phone stays on.
or face the consequences
Ah ha. See, there is the alternative. If it looks like I'm getting kicked off the plane if my phone isn't off, it'll go off. But how is anyone going to know it's not off? I'll take my chances.
And it is my right, as a passenger, to disregard your tinfoil hattery and use my damn device whenever and however I want.
Seriously, you might as well demand that everyone wear a tinfoil hat. It wouldn't be any more or less helpful.
In case you missed the point, you're a fucking idiot. If a fucking cellphone could take down your jet, I wouldn't want to fly on it anyway. You're a shitty pilot and you're blaming it on my cellphone.
If I ever get on a flight where these rules are laid out, then (realizing that you are my pilot) I think I will demand to be let off the plane and rescheduled for a flight with a pilot who is confident that nobody will die and no flights will crash because someone had to take a call.
Admirable that you did some research, but if you were a little more astute you might have noticed that the article cites the source as a Facebook photo - which happens to be public, if you search for her name on Facebook.
(And if that's not large enough, you can download the higher-resolution original, from the option in the gear menu.)
"That" look is not in the least bit anorexic, and if you think it is, perhaps you need to lay off the fritos for awhile.
She is not unrealistically thin, and you'd be doing yourself a favor by trying to look like that. Yes, there are some models who truly are unrealistically thin and set unrealistic standards of beauty. She is not one of them.
In most of the US, a high percentage of the population think that nudity==pornographic.
can't engage in total censorship at will. They can just make speaking expensive
=> "I don't like the way poor people tend to vote; I can't totally ban them from voting, but I can just make voting expensive, a.k.a. poll tax"
No, that argument really doesn't hold water.
Hell yes.
You're moving the goalposts. You originally said:
[if someone bombed the oil platforms,] that "someone" would be a terrorist.
Now you're talking about "OUR" opponent and "OUR" aggression.
Iran may not be a threat to "us" (I assume you mean the United States) but that doesn't mean it's not a credible threat to other countries in that region of the world.
If "someone" bombed Iran's oil platforms, it would probably be one of the countries who consider Iran (and the Iranian nuclear program) a threat, e.g. Israel. And it would be an act of war, not terrorism.
Bullshit. Oil platforms and fuel reserves are perfectly valid targets. Ironically enough, almost all of the US's fuel reserves in the pacific conflict were stored mere miles from Pearl Harbor; if the Japanese had thought of targeting that rather than blowing easily-repaired holes in the hulls of our fleet, we'd have figuratively been sunk - it'd have been infinitely more effective than sinking actual ships. Learn from history, or repeat it: pick one.
Recall the saying "all's fair in love and war". If you're going to do a war, at least do it properly. You don't attack your opponent's fists; if you want to end the conflict, you go for the jugular.
Or the saying "you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs" - it is NOT referring to "collateral" damage. The eggs are the entire fucking target; you unapologetically destroy them.