Eggsellence
If you're nominally in power, but your opponent can rig an election under your nose while you're helpless to do anything about it, you were never actually in power. It opened a lot of eyes to the reality of modern Western democracies, and freed us to pursue something better. I'm grateful for it.
This is not motivated by genuine intellectual or legal confusion. It's clearly driven by a motivation to release criminals back into society against the will of that society as codified by law. God have mercy on these lawyers who use subversive wordplays to allow violent criminals to harm more people, because soon the common people won't.
Please remind me where I said that the driver doesn't need to be looking where they're going... Don't be ridiculous.
We don't have much info yet, it is possible that the driver was reckless or negligent but we don't know that. Given that they fled the scene, it is likely. What we do know is that the driver had right of way, so the pedestrian was almost certainly reckless and negligent.
Every road user has a duty of care. But if a pedestrian wants to unexpectedly throw themselves in front of a moving vehicle, there's little that even the best drivers in the world can do to avoid it.
It is quite common for a collision to occur where at least one driver is not acting at all recklessly, dangerously, or without due care and attention. You are responsible for where your car goes, not for what others illegally, unexpectedly, and unavoidably place in its path.
This was at night, in a city, at an intersection. Can you completely rule out the possibility that this woman, perhaps a little tipsy, ran across the road without checking traffic?
It is clearly intended to convey "right of way", in the sense that the driver was fair and reasonable to expect other traffic - including pedestrians - to be clear of their path through the intersection and thus this pedestrian was technically in the wrong, and likely putting herself in danger by acting recklessly (eg. by jaywalking). It is likely that she left the driver with little to no opportunity to react and avoid the collision.
Of course it doesn't mean that if you see someone contravening traffic laws you get to deliberately plow into them to teach them a lesson...
It's been great until this week when I hit their ridiculously low limit: 300. That's not many tasks/notes, especially as each sub task is counted individually too.
Why is it so low? I'm a paying user. I'm probably burdening their servers with all of 10kB of text! It's such a gut punch, it makes me regret paying for it a little, just because of how petty and hostile it comes across and because of how needlessly disruptive it is to my usage.
If anyone from Todoist happens to see this, please bump that up by an order of magnitude or two. For premium users, at least. It's awful. It breaks your product for me.
According to Wikipedia, 4 of the 6 sources for definitions of mass shootings in America specifically exclude "gang" related shootings. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mass_shootings_in_the_...
How convenient.
Aboriginal Australians have one of the lowest average IQs of any ethnic group on earth, they had little to no concept of agriculture or weaponry, and existed in relatively small disjointed tribes rife with infighting and appalling violence in an unforgiving climate.
Were these people capable of organising, planning, equipping, strategising, and executing an assault on their neighbours? Would it have even been worth it - what would they gain? Even if capable, they may have been wisely unwilling.
I think it's incredibly naive to think that a capable tribe of Aboriginal Australians would have left their defenceless neighbours in peace if they stood in the way of valuable resources. Or that this didn't indeed occur countless times in relatively small skirmishes.
It might be more accurate to say that every people engage(d) in this nature to the extent that they are capable, and that, in relatively modern recorded history, Europeans have proven themselves to be by far the most capable in that regard.
So capable that they are perhaps the first people ever to police themselves in moderation of this behaviour, often explicitly and deliberately acting in the interests of alien people to their own detriment. That is unique.
Mass shooters are not so impulsive. They are patient, focused, and inspired. There's usually a great personal or political motive. They plan, prepare, train, strategise. This is the White man's domain.
Imagine the terror of a people with the killing proclivity of blacks and the killing capacity of Whites!
You might be surprised by how many "White" mass shooters in the US are on prescription pills (almost all of them), or are in fact Jewish/Asian/Hispanic. The US media loves a White shooter, truth be damned.
Unsurprisingly, then, if you break down the rate of homicide by firearm in the US by race, you see similar statistics. ie. European/White Americans have a rate that puts them among the safer European countries; African Americans are among the highest in the world.
>The construction worker, who was months away from becoming a father when he was shot, died in hospital the following day.
>It later emerged the Audi Mr Kaba was driving, which did not belong to him, had been linked by police to a gun incident the day before.
It almost sounds as if Chris Kaba was a law-abiding family man in the wrong place at the wrong time. Having not heard of this case before now, I looked it up, and this man in fact was in the process of conspiring with six others to brutalize and murder another man, was followed and blocked by police, refused to comply with orders, and attempted to flee (putting the officers in harm's way) when an officer fired the fatal shot.
No doubt this disinformation contributed to the false sense of injustice that led to protests by blacks under the impression that they are being targeted by racist, murderous police. No doubt White Brits will be appalled and dumbfounded by the breakdown of law and justice in their indigenous homeland as violent criminals and their kin react with shock and uproar when encountering resistance by law enforcement.
Utterly disgraceful.