Jump to content
IGNORED

How does the World view America these days?


Rubin Farr

Recommended Posts

^ That video is excruciating.

 

 

 

Nebraska, I honestly can't believe I watched that entire thing. What a fucking waste of 20 minutes...but I couldn't stop. Such a fucking joke. My girlfriend got a ticket the other day and was pissed and talking about like fighting game it and I just had this sort of scene in my head. My gf has a more sense than those dingbats, of course, but that statement holds true for many many humans over the age of 15.

 

i thought it was a good example of the "average american citizen's understanding of how the law works". especially the part where she contends that even though she was speeding, since nobody else was on the road and no harm was done, there was no victim and thus, no law could have been broken

 

 

being charged money for a victimless crime is a bit ridiculous

 

 

Why? The whole point is to prevent there being a victim.

 

 

 

 

 

Nebraska, I honestly can't believe I watched that entire thing. What a fucking waste of 20 minutes...but I couldn't stop. Such a fucking joke. My girlfriend got a ticket the other day and was pissed and talking about like fighting game it and I just had this sort of scene in my head. My gf has a more sense than those dingbats, of course, but that statement holds true for many many humans over the age of 15.

i thought it was a good example of the "average american citizen's understanding of how the law works". especially the part where she contends that even though she was speeding, since nobody else was on the road and no harm was done, there was no victim and thus, no law could have been broken

being charged money for a victimless crime is a bit ridiculous

Nebraska, you're entirely correct, and that's exactly what I got from it...but god was it hurting. Even the interview at the end was miserable. Lol.

 

But yeah, Adieu, she could've refused to pay and gone to jail instead. That's always an option.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nebraska, I honestly can't believe I watched that entire thing. What a fucking waste of 20 minutes...but I couldn't stop. Such a fucking joke. My girlfriend got a ticket the other day and was pissed and talking about like fighting game it and I just had this sort of scene in my head. My gf has a more sense than those dingbats, of course, but that statement holds true for many many humans over the age of 15.

 

i thought it was a good example of the "average american citizen's understanding of how the law works". especially the part where she contends that even though she was speeding, since nobody else was on the road and no harm was done, there was no victim and thus, no law could have been broken

 

 

being charged money for a victimless crime is a bit ridiculous

 

 

are you being serious?

 

 

Because charging money for a victimless crime while using the threat of death to enforce it motivates agencies to engage in activities that will increase revenue via this avenue of enforcement. 

 

It's a bad policy and probably ineffective. It's at least not well thought out, because the moment police and government started enriching themselves off the policy "intended to protect lives" (heard this line before?) there was no motivation whatsoever for them to adjust the policy or alter it to a point where enforcement did not equal monetary enrichment.

 

That's why.

 

Same idea with red light cameras although they are even more ridiculous money making machines.

 

It doesn't matter though we are all about to have self-driving cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't matter though we are all about to have self-driving cars.

 

i can't wait. this way, we can eliminate personal responsibility from the equation and just chalk it up to malfunctioning technology. like the tesla car that crashed when the driver is asleep after enabling auto-drive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It doesn't matter though we are all about to have self-driving cars.

 

i can't wait. this way, we can eliminate personal responsibility from the equation and just chalk it up to malfunctioning technology. like the tesla car that crashed when the driver is asleep after enabling auto-drive

 

 

It's in beta firstly

 

secondly there's just as many stories about tesla's saving people's lives

Link to comment
Share on other sites

120km/h speed limit on every single road in the world would be fair I think. 20km/h - 60km/h inside of cities.

 

 

That's extremely slow.

 

I drive 6 hours each way to work each week.

 

I drive at the slowest point 70 mph (you're suggesting 75 mph everywhere)

 

Most of the time I'm driving 80 mph

 

Some of the time I drive 85 mph

 

There are roads here where you can drive 90 mph

 

The thing is that many municipalities put the speed limits lower to "protect people" so I go from being able to drive 80 mph to only being able to drive 70 mph for no apparent reason

 

They do this to collect extra revenue, because they don't have enough crime to support their bloated police forces (same with drug enforcement)

 

cops in smaller towns will wait at awkward places and ticket you for a 5 mph difference

 

This is obviously not to ensure the safety of drivers.

 

It's to collect money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

120km/h speed limit on every single road in the world would be fair I think. 20km/h - 60km/h inside of cities.

 

 

That's extremely slow.

 

I drive 6 hours each way to work each week.

 

I drive at the slowest point 70 mph (you're suggesting 75 mph everywhere)

 

Most of the time I'm driving 80 mph

 

Some of the time I drive 85 mph

 

There are roads here where you can drive 90 mph

 

The thing is that many municipalities put the speed limits lower to "protect people" so I go from being able to drive 80 mph to only being able to drive 70 mph for no apparent reason

 

They do this to collect extra revenue, because they don't have enough crime to support their bloated police forces (same with drug enforcement)

 

cops in smaller towns will wait at awkward places and ticket you for a 5 mph difference

 

This is obviously not to ensure the safety of drivers.

 

It's to collect money.

 

Well for the really unpopulated areas more than 85mph might be okay. But where I live there are many roads without speed limit and people driving 120mph (=over 190km/h) which is certainly too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While there's some evidence that stop signs and similar traffic markings in built up areas are counter productive in terms of road safety, there's none that I'm aware of that speed limits are similarly problematic. Quite the opposite really, road traffic accidents are incredibly highly correlated with speed (much like they used to be with drink driving before that was dramatically reduced, leading to a dramatic reduction in accidents).

 

Robot cars will of course fix all this soon enough though regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol the US government owns a patent on marijuana but it's a schedule I drug.

 

Schedule I

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. Some examples of Schedule I drugs are:

heroin, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), marijuana (cannabis), 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (ecstasy), methaqualone, and peyote

 

Patent:

Cannabinoids as antioxidants and neuroprotectants 
 

Abstract

Cannabinoids have been found to have antioxidant properties, unrelated to NMDA receptor antagonism. This new found property makes cannabinoids useful in the treatment and prophylaxis of wide variety of oxidation associated diseases, such as ischemic, age-related, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases. The cannabinoids are found to have particular application as neuroprotectants, for example in limiting neurological damage following ischemic insults, such as stroke and trauma, or in the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease and HIV dementia. Nonpsychoactive cannabinoids, such as cannabidoil, are particularly advantageous to use because they avoid toxicity that is encountered with psychoactive cannabinoids at high doses useful in the method of the present invention. A particular disclosed class of cannabinoids useful as neuroprotective antioxidants is formula (I) wherein the R group is independently selected from the group consisting of H, CH.sub.3, and COCH.sub.3. ##STR1##

Inventors: Hampson; Aidan J. (Irvine, CA), Axelrod; Julius (Rockville, MD), Grimaldi; Maurizio (Bethesda, MD) Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services (Washington, DC)  Family ID: 26767641 Appl. No.: 09/674,028 Filed: February 2, 2001 PCT Filed: April 21, 1999 PCT No.: PCT/US99/08769 PCT Pub. No.: WO99/53917 PCT Pub. Date: October 28, 1999
 

 

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=6630507.PN.&OS=PN/6630507&RS=PN/6630507

Link to comment
Share on other sites

US Pharmaceutical company jacking prices on medicines...

 
https://twitter.com/i/moments/766735235325173760
 

 

.@MylanNews EpiPens went from $100 in 2008 to $500+ today, even though the epinephrine in them only costs 52 cents

 

 

 

Can you embed twitter posts here?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.