And you completely missed my point. My point was that any kind of population change will have an imbalance of old vs new. Until that imbalance passes, you haven’t seen the final results of the experiment, you’re still in it.
That’s it. Wasn’t touching on the gender imbalance or any of that. So thanks for that giant wall of text, but it’s not the point I was touching on at all.
And you don’t need to tag me in response to my own comment. I see it just fine.
Playing devil’s advocate here, is this really a problem? It should be obvious that if you suddenly cut population growth you’d end up with this elderly vs young imbalance eventually as the generations that reproduced freely age out. This is part of the adjustment as things reach equilibrium. Now, granted, this 1 child policy will still create the same issue moving forward but in a less drastic scale. Ideally you’d have a 2 child policy to actually replace parents 1:1 with kids. But the point is, this imbalance was bound to happen regardless and you really won’t see equilibrium until every person alive was born under the restricted policy. This is still too early to call it a failed experiment. It’s right at the most crucial part.
Say the words. He called her a “Fucking bitch”. Stop fucking censoring language, especially over something like this. If the words offend you, GOOD. You should be fucking offended. (I know OP just reposted the articles censoring - this is directed at the article more than OP)
And again, arguing custody would be arguing AGAINST the shooter. AT BEST, it would get the video thrown out and then we’d just look at the 4 other videos that all show the exact same thing. It literally doesn’t help, at all. It literally only would add a charge of tampering with evidence.
Yeah, I don’t subscribe to that euphemism treadmill bullshit. Maybe save your outrage for things that are actually offensive, like our government murdering people in cold blood, not fucking words. This neutering of our language is bullshit and yes, some things are fucking retarded and need to be called out as such. Trying to defend the shooter here is fucking retarded. I stand by what I said.
And this is why liberals hate other liberals. Were discussing a fucking murder and you’re over here complaining about language. Unless you’re this perfect idealized liberal, other liberals will take the time to bring you down instead of the much more pressing and bigger issue.
Seriously, fuck off with this retarded fucking shit. We NEED words for when things are so ass backwards and anti-logical. I’m not gonna sit here and wish that we “unalive the meanies”. Grow a fucking spine.
I’m a dude with belly button length hair(for the last 20 years) who constantly gets asked how I do it. It has nothing to do with gender. If anything, it’s the misogynistic culture telling you that you MUST do all these things in order to be pretty when most of those things are just getting you to buy more useless products. My hair is sleek and shiny and all I do is use Garnier Fructis shampoo once a week, and their conditioner daily. I let my hair air dry. The end.
But yeah, I’m just some hateful man. Whatever loser. Sorry for pointing out that it doesn’t make sense to put a bunch of moisturizer in your hair and then blast it with high heat daily and wonder why it’s dry and brittle.
And it would be a dumb fucking argument considering the 3-4 other videos that all corroborate this one. Stop being retarded and proposing half-assed “what-ifs”. Besides the fact that him editing it would be tampering with evidence and IS ITS OWN CRIME. Yeah, he’s just gonna admit to illegally tampering with the video to make himself look worse to create reasonable doubt… when other videos clearly show the incident as well. Ffs, I know these people are morons but you’re taking the cake.
If the video conveniently “proved” his claims of self defense, you’d have a point. But it clearly doesn’t. It shows he murdered her and his claims of self defense are a blatant lie. You’re literally arguing “well maybe it was self defense because the video could have been edited by the PERPETRATOR to not show it was self defense”. Like wtf?! You’re arguing that the dude purposely edited the video to make himself look worse.
On his personal phone and not on a body cam or writing it in an official log? Why would a government agent need his own personal evidence against you if not for vigilante harassment?
It was NEVER going to be used as legal evidence. He was collecting her info so he or other ICE could harass her later. That’s why he focuses on all of the identifying info like the stickers and her license plate.
The dude murdered someone and you’re over here wondering how he would legally use his harassment video in court. That was NEVER his intention. That’s EXCATLY why it’s on his phone and not body cam. For personal, illegal use.
The only court this video will see is as an exhibit for the prosecution. And as evidence of him committing murder, chain of custody is just fine.
Nah, more like:
Man: Washes hair daily. That’s it.
Woman: Only washes/wets hair sometimes. Uses lots and lots of various chemicals to force various styles. Lots of blow drying. Hair dyes. Then wonders why hair is obviously chemically and physically damaged.
The problem is most women put TOO much effort into their hair, trying to make it things it’s not, and end up damaging it. Men tend to keep it short and simple and their hair doesn’t end up as damaged.
Also, you notice the Fabio guys a lot more than you notice the broccoli haired dorks. You remember that one hot guy more than you remember the dozens of unkempt ones. Add in that people who can’t grow nice long hair tend to keep it short and you have all kinds of selection biases.
Body cam would be something you could subpoena easier. Phone would be his personal property and he can upload that video anywhere he wants and give it to whomever he wants. Consider we have this video because he sent it to an conservative media outlet trying to get sympathy. We have this video because he’s a fucking moron.
I noticed that too. He clearly was documenting her for future harassment at the very least.
I’d fear for my life and safety if I ever came across an ICE roadblock from now on. I’d feel unsafe stopping. Take that as you will.
What pissed me off, especially on places like Reddit, is the “no doxxing” rule. YOU CANT DOXX A PUBLIC SERVANT. Part of being a government worker is transparency and accountability. You can’t hide behind anonymity.
The concept of doxxing goes way back before people tied their real identity to their online one. “Doxxing” or “providing documents” is the act of tying someone’s real life identity to their anonymous one against their will. It is not identifying someone in public or using it to shield them from due criticism for their actions.
You can’t do that with people who are supposed to be unmasked in the first place, and are legally required to identify themselves as government agents as part of their job. It’s not “doxxing”, it’s basic fucking accountability and transparency.
When Luigi happened we knew everything about his life. This happens and we don’t know who this asshat is. It’s complete bullshit. Any outlet protecting this piece of shit when they would air the dirty laundry of me and you out for the whole world in a heartbeat needs to be blacklisted.
Edit: That fuckers name is Jonathan Ross. He murdered Renee Nicole Good. May he know no peace.
Can I get a link too? I already participate on BOINC
Same! That’s why I wanted to be a sci-fi actor 😂
Oh, and time skips were real! When you saw a flashback or something, that was actually filmed years ago and then they waited until the actors got older and filmed the rest. I assumed there were crazy logistical hurdles to get this to work but it was all real.
Yeah, I basically assumed that if you died as a henchman or something, you had a really bad agent or people just didn’t like you. Only the A-list actors got to have their big moment dying. But I did believe that the payout was enough to take care of your surviving family, which is why people did it. Kinda some weird ass hunger games type idea way before the books ever existed lol
Henchmen who got shot were like a special class of stunt double in my mind. They were paid to get shot and then have surgery and recover just to do it again in another movie. I did think they had a limit to how many “lethal” stunts they could do before they had to retire or go out on one last insane stunt.
I always wanted to be an actor so I could be a sci-fi actor and get to go to space. I thought those were the luckiest people.
I believed number 1 as well! I took it even further because I didn’t understand “acting” fully. I thought it was actually that to be a “doctor actor”, you basically just trained to be both and then they followed you around with a camera while you actually did all of those things. So everyone in a show/movie was actually their profession or something close to it.
Deaths were different for me tho. I thought that as an actor, you decided when you died by taking said part. So it was up to each actor to choose the best death scene for themselves because it would be the only one they got. Better actors got offered better deaths while lesser actors only got to die as henchmen and whatnot. There was a whole life insurance/payout idea that played into all of this. But basically I thought actors fought for the prestige of dying on camera in the coolest ways possible.
I’m not saying this exact system worked. What I’m saying is pointing to the old vs young imbalance is disingenuous because ANY system that attempts to limit population growth will experience the same “sudden change”. Hell, any system that limits ANYTHING will eventually have “group that had it” vs “group that didn’t”. Saying “there’s a lot more old people from before we limited the population” is like telling me fire is hot.
The question shouldn’t be “is the transition perfect” but “does the system that follows actually work?”. We shouldn’t discount all systems that want to limit population growth like this because ones with better metrics could actually work. And as we’ve seen, this program DID WORK. It lowered population. Just not in socially healthy ways.
It’s just not logical to complain that if you have less of a growing population that your elderly population outnumbers them. That’s LITERALLY THE PURPOSE OF POPULATION CONTROL. To have less being born. Of course the elderly from before will outnumber them - you weren’t controlling their population!