Both. I have Bi-Polar2. When I am in manic phase, I vent. When I am depressed, I bottle things up.
Would you befriend someone with an incurable mental illness?
Printable View
Both. I have Bi-Polar2. When I am in manic phase, I vent. When I am depressed, I bottle things up.
Would you befriend someone with an incurable mental illness?
Yes. I always do :)
Do you believe that everything happens for a reason?
Yes and no. Fate is a process of universal interplay that, in effect, drives itself. That means we are in a world where almost anything could happen to us--including some really nasty things. But my belief is that there is a reason we are in such a place.
Would you be willing to sacrifice a significant amount of civil liberties if it meant a significant reduction in the risk of domestic terrorism?
Well reducing the risk from near zero to slightly nearer zero isn't worth ceding anything, and hypothetically I always go for civil liberties. However If I had children whose lives were constantly being threatened by terrorist activities (say a bomb, in my town, every week) I would be more inclined to deal with email and phone tapping or whatever else they want to do to reduce the threat. Oh and my town has a population of around eight thousand, so one bomb a week would be pretty grim.
Anyway I say no except in the most unbelievably dire circumstances.
Would you support someone in public office (politician, president, chief of police, etc) acting illegally or outside the confines of the law if it meant they were genuinely able to do a better job?
Not unless I get to break the law because of my own incompetence, too.
If you were a cop, and you discovered that your mother had been a political radical who had committed murder long before you were born, and no one else knew, and the chances were virtually nil that anyone would ever know that you knew, and even she didn't know that you knew, would you have her arrested?
Definitely not.
Police body cams, yes or no?
Yes. It protects all parties.
Affirmative action, yes or no?
Big no.
And yeh body cams are a great idea, I don't understand the debate.
Are slippery slope arguments serviceable or is it always just fallacious reasoning?
Police officers should not wear body cams.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clopin
I'm really surprised there's seemingly so little debate on the matter; what of the privacy of those being arrested, and by law are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? What of the privacy of witnesses being questioned, who may want to remain anonymous for various reasons, such as there own personal safety and threat of retaliation from the accused.
Body cams are a slippery slope, that inevitably leads to Global Warming.;)
Would you be willing to wear a body cam at work?
The videos aren't going to be uploaded to YouTube or anything... There are 900'000 officers in the U.S so you're looking at over a million hours of footage (at least) every day. This isn't feasibly going to monitored by anyone and will exist as evidence in cases where it needs to be looked at; such as when lethal force has been used and there is a question as to whether it was legitimate self defense or otherwise justified or a gross use of excess force. It's important to know.
As for witnesses, this has already been solved with voice scramblers and... not showing their face, so that's a total non issue.
Innocent until proven guilty means you somehow can't be filmed? Okay, why?
And my job? Well actually I work in childcare and if there was some reason the public wanted body cams installed (for example if childcare workers were molesting or suspected of molesting their charges at an endemic rate) then I would go along with it. The comparison is pretty stupid though; the police are targeted for body cams over say, office workers, or teachers, because they carry guns and are authorized to KILL PEOPLE in extreme situations, which is totally unique to law enforcement.
How much popcorn is too much?
Double post
Really, you trust public servants to guard your privacy... are you insane?Quote:
Originally Posted by Clopin
Will the police have to tell everyone they encounter, or even pass by, that they are being recorded – with the intent that the recording may be used against them? What of filming inside an eyewitnesses house, it would be a breach of an innocent’s privacy. How long is the video retained, where and what government entity would manage the millions of hours of footage, who all has access, will 'Right to Information' laws apply?
And btw, "deadly force" is not unique to law enforcement.
Self defense laws, especially here in Florida, include deadly force... why not force everyone to wear body cams? Public safety is certainly more important than individual freedoms, isn't it?
Uh huh, better to trust public servants to wield deadly force with little to no accountability right? Police body cams aren't so the police can institute a big brother state where they film the inside of your house (the horror), they are to protect individual freedoms in the face of excessive police violence, or to protect police officers from undue recriminations when suspected of using undue force, when the force was really justified.
Forcing everyone to wear a body cam at all times is not even close to analogous to having police officers wear them while on duty, performing their jobs as public servants who are given a very large amount of power, including the power to act with deadly force.
if I eat too much popcorn----somewhere just over a half a bag of the standard microwave popcorn size---I get a constricted feeling in my upper chest...
back to my earlier question---have you read some books that were better movies? (which ones?)
(and Daniel craig is my favorite bond)