kelpdiver

China is the opposite - so much coal is used for power generation that in some cities (Xi'an for example), the air quality is so bad that your eyes hurt. You can feel the pollution on your eyeball! Can't imagine doing any level of physical exertion that would get you breathing hard. Even sex would hurt. Maybe it's birth control.

which part of 50% is confusing?

Sounds like they would like the new bail to be set at 10X the bank account value, so he'll need to forfeit it all to the bail bondsman.

there is plenty of private businessmen in China and they're doing extremely well. But it's similar to the money elite in Russia - they better stay on good terms with the government or they may suddenly be thrown in jail for some trumped up charge.

Nope, but if she decides to fuck a guy making $10 an hour who has 29 children with 10 women, she shouldn't complain he is unable to pay child support. I doubt he is so forthcoming. This is getting dangerously close to 'the bitch shouldn't wear a mini skirt if she doesn't want to get fucked.'

I will wait to see the defense explanation for the passports. That was the reverse of the initial description (turned in the new one, not the old one). The bank account is a different matter. I think they'll show that they put that in order. But the passport claim is more damning, though effectively you would have to get on a boat to avoid the immediate flagging of the ID when trying to use it to travel in a TSA controlled location.

Why do you hate science/math? I hate bad propaganda. (I enjoy good propaganda, but this was shit)

Personally, I would strongly advise against that tact. Continue, and I can almost assure you that sooner or later some bozo is going to take offense and put you into a situation where all your choices are bad ones. silence = consent.

lot of "special' math going on in this press release, Brent.

Initiatives are especially vulnerable to this, but still true to a large degree for legislation as well. Simple bills are easier to sell. 3 strikes and you're out. Use a gun, go to prison (extra time for gun crimes). Commit any sex crime, be registered for life (even for teens sexting each other). To write a well crafted proposal that covers the grey areas well...now you have a complicated bill and maybe there's a few compromise decisions between members of the subcommittee. More ammo for an opponent to make a scare out of it.

The same happens with citizens, except that they usually get jailed and they don't get paid administrative leave. Take Zimmerman - how well is he doing in the aftermath? In and out of jail, unemployable, has credible death threats. That's hardly something anyone would look for. Cops have it much better than that, usually get the benefit of the doubt given the tough situations they can get placed into. Such as? Again, Zimmerman isn't coming out too well here. Why on earth would he manipulate a situation to get into it again? I think you'll find a lot more cops with multiple shootings than citizens claiming SYG. At Frontsight's 4 day (or 2 day) defensive handgun class, they spend a couple hours talking about the best case scenarios after a defensive shooting. It includes going to jail, spending 6 figures on your defense....the conclusion is that you better be sure you're willing to accept that cost and really believe that you or your family is in peril. I believe the CCW classes are no different in this regard. They are not encouraging people to go Charles Bronson on society. why? A cop walks up to a speeder he just pulled over with his stick out or his hand on the holster. Called being prepared. If I had to have a face to face meeting with someone I suspected might escalate a dispute into a violent attack, I'd bring a conceal weapon in spite of the CA laws prohibiting such. That's not a premeditated plan on my part to commit murder, it's my planning not to get killed. The mere possession of a gun cannot be translated into preconceived intent to use it. Especially not for a CCW permit holder, but nor for any citizen with a reasonable concern for his own safety. (The last part is more my opinion, but with mixed case law to support it)

He had two, it turned out and lied about it. hence the revocation of bail. read a little more. maybe a small point but from the AP: "Prosecutors also said Zimmerman had failed to surrender a second passport, but the judge dismissed that concern as the equivalent of someone who has lost a driver's license, applies for a new one and then finds the old driver's license." now that we've beaten that one to death, TK, how about getting back to your mistaken claim that he had full access to this "secret" bank account, the stated reason for revocation of bail. And if the concern is merely about the amount, and it wasn't so important to immediately jail him, why not have the hearing first? Why the insistence on giving him 48 hours to report back to jail and then dick around for a while before having the bail hearing? Seems a bit vindictive.

Should have thought of that before she decided to let the guy fuck her. I don't have any sympathy for the women in this case. I do for the children. whoa - the GOP has possessed SkyDekker.... her bad decision does not relieve him of his legal obligations.

Even late at night, Berlin seems pretty safe. Though you only have to go back a couple decades when machine guns kept one side of the city and (current) nation away from the other side. The integration process was a bit nasty as well. The city has a lot of memorial grounds.

For clarity, in your opinion, what IS the SYG argument about? the political debate is largely an extension of the gun control debate, as well as the right of people to act on their own, rather than call the police.

Do you believe this is really what the debate of SYG is about?

Aren't they willing participants with this guy? I point both you and SD to post #15 in this thread. Nonetheless, women are still harmed when the other half of a conception doesn't contribute financially. Each is 50% responsible for this situation. But when the man runs off, she bears not only the extra 50% of the financial costs, but the health, career, and financial costs of pregnancy.

the greatest effectiveness of "he's gay, you know" or "he got a hard-on when my daughter sat on his lap" is going to be with the new relationships where women are quite wary of danger or wasting their time. Unfortunately there, the damage is to a potential relationship that could have been weeks to wife, but cannot be established. I could see a defense attorney argue that if mere statements were enough to derail a marriage, it must already have been on thin ice.

If you had read somewhat clearly, you would have seen those were not the situations I had in mind, since a confrontation was already taking place. I guess I am hoping that most people you reference in "us" have better reading comprehension. now you're just weaseling. Initiating a new confrontation doesn't preclude an existing (and just as vaguely defined) confrontation. So in a manner made famous by Kallend, you're arguing an unstated belief where you can answer any discourse with "that's not what I meant" rather than take a real stand. All the while, you're asserting a general belief that if an armed person enters a situation that leads to him using his gun, he is criminally responsible.

Well, the linked article has that listed as one of the variables studied. Out of 192 cases, the analysis indicated (yes, it's hindsight) 120 could have retreated 25 could not have retreated 47 it wasn't clear or it was disputed. Wendy - my question is WHO did this analysis? I bet you'd see very different summaries if it were done by Wayne LaPirerre versus Josh Sugarman.

Well, that's the problem. You make that statement (along with one other), I give excepting situations which you accept, leaving us with the question then, what are you really saying here. "This is bad, except when it isn't?"

then there's the secondary question about her claims to have (illegally) purchased a gun in Florida. For what? Seems inconsistent with her claimed beliefs. Was this for hunting crocs? Or was it just made up?

such as? A neighborhood watch captain checking on a stranger? Or something else that really happened, with a frequency count? It's easy to debate using a vague strawman, but it serves no purpose.

the children, and the various women, are being harmed by a irresponsible breeder without the finances to support his actions. This is very different from that family with 20+ kids (Dugans?). Maybe the state could pay for billboards with his face on it - "do not have sex with this man - he's a deadbeat."

This I agree with. I can think of many circumstances where this would be perfectly appropriate. Punks harassing a woman at the bus stop. People defacing/grafitizing a park. Telling them to stop it, you're calling the police, and they should leave is a proper action. If their response is to physically attack you, you haven't yielded your right to self defence. Note this is very different from walking up with the gun drawn, though if the harassment had already progressed to assault, are you going to tell me that's wrong too? Do nothing and let the police show up 2 days later is a big part of society's problem now. No one will even speak up.