Gyroscopic Investing

MachineGhost wrote:

Reub wrote: Did you see the video of the cop in the San Bernardino terrorist attack placing himself in the middle of the carnage and telling the innocents to follow him out and not to worry because he will take the bullet for them?  I doubt it.

How many good cops does it take to make up for all the bad?  How about we focus on the bad cops so we can get rid of them?  Pulling the wool over your eyes or waving your hand away like a fairy doesn't get that job done.

Only one, if he/she were the one who saved my wife or kid's life. 

... M

The women were teenagers and grandmothers. Most were living on the margins. All of them were black. And during a month-long trial that became a symbol of police predation, they formed a bleak parade of 13 witnesses who accused a former Oklahoma City officer of using his badge to coerce sex acts and rape.

On Thursday, after 45 hours of deliberation, a jury convicted Daniel Holtzclaw, 28, on five counts of rape and 13 other counts of sexual assault, including six of sexual battery.

The convictions included four for first-degree rape, which carries a possible sentence of life in prison. He will appear in court on 21 January for sentencing.

Holtzclaw was cleared of a further 18 of the 36 charges he faced, including rape, sexual battery, burglary, indecent exposure and stalking.

Read the rest here...
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015 ... uilty-rape

Anybody watch Making a Murderer yet?

Pretty much ties up this entire thread. Chilling stuff.

Oklahoma cop gets 263 years for raping women.

Kriegsspiel wrote: Oklahoma cop gets 263 years for raping women.

That works for me.

"This is the kind of thing that makes it harder for people to trust the police,"
Booker told the Daily News. "And it makes people like me angry.
I used to be a police officer."

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20160 ... _cops.html

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote: That's the ugly reality we have to start with when assembling beliefs about what political methods lead to the best results in society.

Do libertarians necessarily believe that their methods lead to the best results in society?

How about recognizing that no one knows what's best for society, so let's just establish some rules so that your pursuit of happiness doesn't interfere with mine.

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Jack Jones wrote:Do libertarians necessarily believe that their methods lead to the best results in society?

Why the hell would anyone plan how society ought to be run with any other goal in mind?

Because the "best results for society" is subjective and unattainable.

I also think Drinker's points are relatively true.  My wife and I were having a conversation yesterday about why multiculturalism is a pipe dream when dealing with more than a few who have no choice to blend in rather than forming their own conclave.  I see two types of people:  The "IS" people and the "OUGHT" people.  The "IS" people understand loyalty to the tribe, whether the tribe be family, friends, their church, their boss, even those who drive a similar type vehicle, and understand it is usually preferable to hang with ones "own" kind.  Look at the examples: Prius drivers think Escalade drivers are ignorant boobs, Chinatown, Little Italy, the hood, guys think blonds have more fun, the animals at doggie day care gathering into like groups of big, little, black, brown.  The list goes on.  The "OUGHTS" tend to hang together and think the "IS" people just don't get it that the planet is more important than the people who inhabit it.  Vegans, vegetarians, paleos, sushi lovers, brisket lovers (kudos to Desert) all vs. each other, cigar smokers vs. the evil tobacco folks, NASCAR lovers vs. the ballet lovers.  The lists are endless and I did not even get to the Pollock jokes, Aggie jokes, strong armed posturing by nations, Christians vs. Muslims or Catholics vs. Pentecostals that illustrate how tribal we humans and animals really are.  And lastly, those tribes that I belong to are certainly of more value and importance than those beastly tribes you kow-tow to. 
.

... M

Mountaineer wrote:Vegans, vegetarians, paleos, sushi lovers, brisket lovers (kudos to Desert) all vs. each other, cigar smokers vs. the evil tobacco folks, NASCAR lovers vs. the ballet lovers.  The lists are endless and I did not even get to the Pollock jokes, Aggie jokes, strong armed posturing by nations, Christians vs. Muslims or Catholics vs. Pentecostals that illustrate how tribal we humans and animals really are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkckVLeIN4k&t=0m14s

Hank Williams, Jr wrote: Mothers against drunk drivers
The Pope is against the pill
The Union's against their workers working against their will
The President's against the Congress
The Senate is against the House
People are against politicians
And I'm against cats in my house

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Jack Jones wrote:Because the "best results for society" is subjective and unattainable.

Is that true, or is that just a meme?

How can you be sure?

A woman gets knocked up against her will. She never wanted to have children and certainly not this guy's child. Should she be allowed to have an abortion? What's the best result for her? What's the best result for the unborn child? What's the best result for society?

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Jack Jones wrote: A woman gets knocked up against her will. She never wanted to have children and certainly not this guy's child. Should she be allowed to have an abortion? What's the best result for her? What's the best result for the unborn child? What's the best result for society?

I have an answer to this, but I see your reply as dodging the question.

Either the various ways of running a society have a mathematical optimum or they do not. You've asserted that they do not.

I was simply asking you how sure you were that you were correct, and from where you derived that certainty.

My point is that if we as a society can't agree on an issue like abortion does it make sense to talk about a mathematically optimum society?

Either IDB is just trolling, or I have to revise my view of him.

It's too bad - I liked him a lot at first

jafs wrote: Either IDB is just trolling, or I have to revise my view of him.

It's too bad - I liked him a lot at first

S/he's young. Most everyone needs to go through that phase.

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

dualstow wrote: S/he's young. Most everyone needs to go through that phase.

I'm not young anymore and I've thought my ideas through. Unfamiliar and uncomfortable ideas are not automatically wrong. Remember - life begins where your comfort zone ends.

They're not automatically right either.

You aren't a genius just because people think you're crazy.

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote:You aren't a genius just because people think you're crazy.

No, I'm a genius because I accurately observe reality despite literally everyone pressuring me to embrace delusion.

Literally everyone? That's a bit hard to believe... to say the least.

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Libertarian666 wrote:You aren't a genius just because people think you're crazy.

No, I'm a genius because I accurately observe reality despite literally everyone pressuring me to embrace pleasant delusions instead.

You accurately observe reality? A pleasant delusion indeed.

Evidence from previous posters who didn't work out here suggests that an unwillingness to admit you might be wrong and consider alternative points of view is the number one reason why some eventually get banned or leave on their own.

It's clear that you feel pretty certain about the way you see things now. But consider how certain you felt believing whatever it is you believed before. You were wrong then, obviously… but couldn't you just as easily be wrong now?

I've gone through this cycle several times myself. Each time, what I believe seems so correct and obvious. Then I discover new ways of thinking about things, or my life changes and the new circumstances give me a new point of view, and the certainty with which I held my previous beliefs looks a little foolish.

Obviously what you currently believe right now is something you feel is correct, and this is true of all of us. Nobody believes things they think are wrong. All I'm saying is have a bit of humility and be willing to consider other perspectives. Believing that you're right doesn't require you to be a jerk about it.

Pointedstick wrote: Obviously what you currently believe right now is something you feel is correct, and this is true of all of us. Nobody believes things they think are wrong.

Sez you! 

Incredibly disturbing. Looking at this, there can be no doubt. 

TennPaGa wrote: The Conspiracy to Brutalize Derrick Price
-- Conor Friedersdorf in The Atlantic

~Afterward is the same incident as captured by a private surveillance camera:

video

ADDED: I'm surprised the poor guy could walk to the car on his own afterwards.

IDrinkBloodLOL wrote:

Jack Jones wrote:You accurately observe reality? A pleasant delusion indeed.

That's how they get you, they stuff your head full of relativism until you think nothing but delusion is possible.

The best way to keep people away from something isn't a big guarded fortress, it's to convince them it doesn't exist. You aren't looking for gold buried in your back yard right now because you are certain there is none.

That's how relativists are about truth.

I feel your fire.

Don't be afraid to let down a little and maybe soak up some new ideas, though.  Pretend you are a vampire-turned-anthropologist.

No need to pee on every single tree.

Cop who killed college student and 55-year-old mother sues for ‘extreme emotional trauma’...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/pos ... al-trauma/

Nearly 50 Georgia correctional officers arrested for drug trafficking

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/11/politics/ ... index.html

West Virginia Woman Acquitted for Stepping Between Dog and Cop Who Wanted to Kill It

A West Virginia woman who stood between her dog and a cop who was about to shoot it was acquitted by a jury of obstruction charges on February, 29th, 2016.

West Virginia state trooper Seth Cook testified that he was not afraid of the dog, but was following training that required him to kill all dogs that approach him, even if it was chained and wagging its tail as Buddy was doing in this case.

And because Tiffanie Hupp tried to stop him from doing so, she was arrested.

Read the rest here...

https://photographyisnotacrime.com/2016 ... o-kill-it/

That is all kinds of messed up.  :-(