Elite_Marksman

Correct me if I am wrong, but does the FAA not require a certificate to modify any A/C from its original design? Assuming you are in the US, of course.

It looks like his rotor caught his own lift cable... Very lucky to not have any serious injuries from the pilot or the people on the ground after that.

I realize that the chances of sentient life in general existing are much larger, but my point is that the chances of us existing in exactly the way we do today with all of our unique (as a species and as individuals) characteristics is unimaginably small. Off topic, but for things of similar unimaginability... The value of pi was recently calculated to 10 trillion digits. If you wanted to store a 10 trillion digit number on your computer it would take just shy of 4 TERAbytes of storage... At DVD quality, 4TB is 2127 hours of video.

And that number only takes into account everything that had to happen before we existed. Not only did Earth have to form, it had to form the right distance from the right star. It had to be massive enough to have a molten metallic core (otherwise no magnetic field), and large enough to cool slowly (Mars used to have a magnetic field, but the core has since solidified and the magnetic field is gone. Humans could not survive on Mars without EM shielding even if it had an Earth-like atmosphere.) The right combination of chemicals had to be present in right environments to form a self-replicating organism. That first organism had to have the right mutation to create the next link in the ancestry of mankind, as did every subsequent generation. Each of those organisms with the right mutations had to survive long enough to reproduce. The various major events in Earth's history (Ice Ages, meteor strikes, etc) had to happen at the right time and in the right place, lest the chain of the correct mutations be broken... And that's probably not even close to complicated enough. Basically statistics say there is absolutely no rational reason why we should exist and not some other organism, and even less reason why an individual person, with their unique physical and psychological traits should exist, and yet we do. Both viewpoints - probability of you existing and certainty of you existing - share a common trait with religion. Neither opinion is objectively correct nor objectively incorrect, they are simply different belief systems used by people to explain what is probably the two questions we will never answer. Why do we exist, and what is the purpose, if any, of our existence?

Why not? The Republicans don't have to compromise on anything. They're going to get their cuts and no new taxes and all they had to do was sit back in their chairs and cross their arms. It was the DEMS that rejected a plan that would have increased revenue by roughly 500 billion and cut spending by roughly 700 billion. Of course, the MSM and Obama are calling it 'Republican obstructionism'....quelle surprise. They're politicians, do we expect any different? I'd sooner be a used car salesman at a buy-here-pay-here joint than run for mayor...

Source; http://www.aclu-sc.org/attach/p/Pepper_Spray_New_Questions.pdf I would be interested in whether or not this number includes people who were only pepper sprayed and then physically restrained or if it also included cases where pepper spray was ineffective and the police were forced to escalate to baton strikes and/or lethal force. If the latter, the number is vastly skewed.

Never denied that they were sprayed, or that they were sprayed in the face. I denied that it was forced down their throats and that they were held down and sprayed. From what I can see in the video, the officers are not pinning the people who are being sprayed down.

Sorry, on that video I don't see anyone being held down and sprayed. They are being sprayed as they resist being pulled off the walkway. None of the officers are holding them down and spraying them though.

It is a chemical... just not in the way you think it is. EVERYTHING is a chemical. You, and me, and our computers are just a specific set of chemicals arranged in a specific way. "Chemicals" are not inherently evil. As far as the second point, there are times when police are allowed to use weapons. The state grants the police power to use force in order to gain compliance when the situation demands it. In this instance, the situation demanded force be used to gain compliance from the students. EDIT - I would also add that a weapon is nothing but a specific subset of tools. A rifle, a knife, a hammer, a can of pepper spray , a lever, a motor all have one thing in common. They are but tools, neither inherently innocent or inherently evil - they are inanimate objects incapable of having thoughts or feelings, they simply exist. It is people who give the objects meaning and must select the appropriate tool for the job. A rifle would be very ineffective at building a desk, but a hammer is essential. A motor would be very ineffective at hunting for food, but a rifle allows one to eat. You could not use a can of pepper spray to lift a heavy object, but a lever makes it trivial. Pepper spray is merely a tool, in the subset of weapons, in the sub-subset of less-than-lethal weapons, that allows people to gain compliance from other people who do not want to follow a lawful order.

"Eyewitnesses" are among the LEAST reliable sources of evidence. Mainly because people are inherently biased, especially so if the witnesses were also members of the protest. If you were to put 20 different people of random racial, political, gender, and age backgrounds in a situation where they would view an incident and then immediately separate them after the incident and question them separately, you will get 20 different versions of what happened. Hypothetical situation: In reality, a 20 year old Caucasian male with long hair wearing a red windbreaker and blue jeans steals a man's briefcase. The victim is wearing a black overcoat and black pants. When you interview the 20 "eyewitnesses" you will have: Some people say he's a young white guy. Some people say he's a young white girl. Some people say he's a young Hispanic guy. Some people say he's a young black guy. Some people say he's wearing a red jacket. Some people say he's wearing a red shirt. Some people say he's wearing a black coat. Some people say he stole a breifcase. Some people say he stole a purse. Some people say the victim was a woman. Some people say the victim was a man. /Hypothetical situation People are incapable of giving 100% accurate descriptions of a situation they witnessed. People naturally interject their own opinion and bias into any situation they observe. In this case, the video does clearly show the entire event. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6GMmpgrAlE&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjnR7xET7Uo&feature=player_embedded The first video is a little farther back from the crowd, but clearly shows the situation and about 6 minutes prior to the use of pepper spray. The second video is much closer and has an unobstructed view of the actual spraying. As far as the coughing up blood part, there is no evidence of that other than what the media has reported. Between the person who was actually coughing up blood (if that really happened) and us is at a bare minimum, the person, the person at the media outlet they contacted, the writer of the article, and the editor of the article. Go play "whisper down the lane" with 4 people where the message that is being transmitted is politically/emotionally charged. Now, more realistically, the guy was coughing up 45 minutes later and told his buddy about it, who told his buddy, who told the reporter, who told the writer, whose work was edited.... you get the picture. Maybe he was still just hacking, maybe he had a pre-existing condition, maybe the pepper spray directly caused him to cough up blood, nobody but him knows for sure. Based on the situation and the amount of force the police used, there is absolutely nothing wrong with this incident. The police were attempting to leave the area, the students were blocking their path and refused to move. On the first video the officers can be clearly heard ordering the students to clear a path and warned them, both verbally and visually (displaying and shaking the pepper spray in view of the students) that there was an imminent use of force. The students still refused to comply with the order so the police exercised their right to gain compliance. I did not intend that to be attacking you individually. It was intended to be that the reports you are quoting, even if they are from eyewitnesses, are biased. Quite obviously so when the police can be clearly seen to NOT be forcing pepper spray down the throats of the students.

Maybe you should watch the video before you spew biased shit from your ass. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/19/uc-davis-police-pepper-spray-students_n_1102728.html?icid=maing-grid7|main5|dl1|sec1_lnk3|114240 The police did not "force open their mouths and pepper-spray down their throats." The officer walked down the line of people sitting in the walkway hitting each of them twice from about 2 feet away with a can of pepper spray. After the second pass was completed other officers moved in and removed the people from the walkway. Two people went to the hospital but were immediately released.

It's almost tragic you've to ask that, but here's an option: The cop tells the protester to move his ass. If the protester refuses the cop warns him he will be arrested. If the protester refuses to move after that, he/she gets arrested. With as little as force possible. In civilized countries pepper-spray is usually only used against aggressive people, that pose a threat for the officer. Pepperspray isn't harmless and only an idiot would use it for no reason whatsoever. I've no idea what Mobile Field Force Tactics are, but I'm rather sure you don't need them against a couple of kids sitting on the pavement doing nothing. You do realize that using pepper spray is far less dangerous to all involved than going hands-on to effect an arrest? With pepper spray you get a very unpleasant sensation, but it is not harmful, even if sprayed directly in your face. Ask your local cop, if he carries OC, he's been hit with it. Also, if you watched the whole video, they weren't just sitting there "doing nothing." They were preventing the police from leaving the area. If you notice there is a group of officers completely surrounded by people who refuse to move out of the way. After the people on the sidewalk are sprayed they are moved out of the way and the group of officers rejoins the rest of the officers and they leave the campus. Sitting still on the ground is NOT the same as "doing nothing." Ask MLK or Ghandi about that one.

Didn't they already pay for the fuel when they bought the ticket?

The horror. Those sons of bitches. You never really learned anything in your civics classes, did you? That's a pretty wide miss, for an elite marksman. Watch the video. The part before the pepper spray. They were blocking police officers from leaving. They were ordered to move. They refused to move. They were warned they would be sprayed if they did not move. The still refused to move. They were moved. The right to peaceably assemble does not give one the right to interfere with the lives and business of others. Watch the video closely, they were ordered only to clear the sidewalk, not disperse completely. The only people sprayed were those who refused a lawful order to clear the sidewalk.

You mean the video with the people sitting across a walkway refusing to move, thus causing a public disturbance and an unnecessary interference with the rights of the other students? Yeah, I watched that one. The officer clearly displayed the big red bottle of OC spray, the people know what is going to happen if they refuse to move, they still refuse to move, force is applied as necessary to restore order.