@jsl76 said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:

What it really boils down to is this: Under the current policing and use-of-force logic in most U.S. police departments, the shooting of Bryant was appropriate and justified. It's tragic, to be sure. But it fell within the scope of the officer's training. There's room to disagree as to whether this ought to be the logic of most police forces -- but that's a different, broader argument. People will disagree, but given the reality of the situation, I don't see an alterative that makes any sense. The Bryant case is a very, very weak hook for "police should be less violent" arguments, because there are many other, better, cases to shoehorn that perspective.

The real question isn't whether the officer did what he was trained to do: when presented with a potentially dangerous situation, escalate to the point of forced action, then overwhelm the offender with lethal violence. (Let's be clear: he brought a gun to a knife fight!)

No, the real questions are these:

• Are we properly training our police... at all (regardless of the role we want them to play!)?
• Do we want to train our police officers to be "protectors" or to be para-military "enforcers"?
• Are we enabling our police officers to do anything BUT escalate and control?
• Are we glorifying the "SWAT" and other violence-based, militarized police units (which have a role, no question) to the detriment of the increasingly rarefied "beat cop" who establishes relationships with citizens and seeks to "keep the peace" (vs. "enforce the law")....

When a cop today encounters an enraged woman flashing a knife, should he:
a) draw his weapon and eliminate the threat - real or potential - with lethal force, as quickly as possible, or
b) try to de-escalate the situation: try to calm her down, convince her to drop the weapon and then arrest her, or
c) get other people away from the situation (to safety) & then try to get more information about what led to the current crisis... try to understand the situation, and find a non-violent solution

When the situation is over, what is the desired (most likely to be rewarded) result?
a) the perpetrator is in a body bag and everyone else is safe
b) the perpetrator is in handcuffs and everyone else is safe
c) the perpetrator is in the back of the squad car, on the way to a hospital to be evaluated, and everyone else is safe?

Honestly, in today's policing, the answers here are a) and a)... and that is frightening!

Human sexuality is such a fluid thing...
Assuming you are a man:

• you can look at one man and be incredibly turned on, and find virtually no other man sexually attractive in the least... that doesn't make you gay!
• you can look at one woman and be incredibly turned on, and find virtually no other woman sexually attractive in the least... that doesn't make you straight!

As humans, we strive (both constantly, and futilely) to bring order to our own existence.

But the Universe isn't about order, it's about chaos!

The Kinseys found that there were VERY few men who never EVER found another man sexually attractive; and equally so, they found VERY few men who never EVER found a woman sexually attractive. And the same was found for women.

Interestingly, they found that women were culturally - in the 1950's and 1960's - far more open/receptive to accepting/admitting that they were attracted to something "not standard" for them.

The idea that "to be gay" you have to not (ever) find a woman sexually alluring, and "to be straight" you cannot (ever) find another man to be sexually attractive is purely a social construct.

There ARE rare exceptions (and you may indeed be one of them) - but if you're someone who claims "it's all of one, and none of the other", then you are probably (not definitely, just probably) deceiving yourself!

Statistically speaking, most of us are "fluid" - we have a preference, but we will find exceptions our own "rules"!

As the father of 5 boys, I'll tell you what I've told my children as they have grown:

• If your dick gets hard, you're attracted to it!

That doesn't give you license to ACT on that attraction, but it is what it is and you can't change it! The goal in life is to find someone who makes your dick hard, and for whom you cause the same reaction (clearly, not "their dick being hard" for a woman, but you get the point)....

@chanelkokoro said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:

@bi4smooth

This seems slightly off. The military is much better trained than police are, they kind of have to be.

How is it "off" when you re-state my case?

US Police forces have been trained (in 30-second intervals) to behave like our military - and given some of the same weaponry and other "tools of warfare" - and then turned loose on our own population.

... with less training than a barber or cosmetologist!

And then we stand back and wonder why innocent (and hell, even guilty) people are killed by those same poorly trained, improperly trained (that is: trained in the wrong skills - for military operations, not policing ones!), overly equipped officers?

@chanelkokoro said in Party of family values part 1 :

@raphjd but contraception is healthcare,

exactly - which is why politics & religion have almost no place at the table when talking about these issues (IMHO)

@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1 :

@bi4smooth

You mean the same religions that have stonings and went on murderous rampages through the region?

Yup - same ones! Same ones that sanctioned slavery! Same ones that sanctioned genocide - multiple times throughout history!

Glad there's no confusion there...

Murder was wrong then, and its wrong now.

Men were sinners then, and they are sinners now!

@chanelkokoro said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:

@vmalar also we don't know why person a had the knife, it's possible she was defending herself, and it's possible she may have been the person to call the police in the first place.

to me it's just pathetic how cops shoot people to death the minute the situation becomes a little inconvenient. They rather someone else's life end than working harder to defuse a situation. This is what our taxpayer dollars are going towards?

Many American police departments use militarized training tactics:

• ELEVATE tensions and exert complete and total control
• civilians who resist - especially those with weapons - are treated as "enemy combatants" and are open ("eligible") for lethal repercussions

The vast majority of US law enforcement are never trained in de-escalation techniques, nor are they rewarded for non-violent interventions that defuse a situation, thus avoiding an arrest... to the contrary, they are often evaluated based on the number of arrests made.

A commonly cited, but equally true statement about US law enforcement training is sad, but telling: in most jurisdictions you need more hours of training to become a hair stylist than to become a police officer.

@raphjd said in Party of family values part 1 :

@eobox91103

Pro-Life is giving each person a chance.

Pro-Choice is killing people before they have a chance.

Clearly, you liberals are unable to understand that.

Let's try it this way:

Thou shalt not kill

It doesn't say: thou shalt not kill babies any more than it says thou shalt not kill murderers....

What really gets me are the pro-lifers who argue that rape & incest pregnancies should be exceptions. Sure, the kid's father is a criminal, so just OK their murder because of the actions of their father...

That's the American Way!

Just to set the record straight here:

Biden didn't kill the $15 minimum wage, the Parliamentarian of the Senate did when they ruled that that part of the legislation couldn't pass through the "budget reconciliation" rule - which is how they passed it without the "danger" of a filibuster.

Biden is a "tax and spend Liberal - the same as he was in the '70's... the biggest differences are

1. he is dreaming much bigger now! Who, in the 1970's, would have had the balls to propose spending at these levels! Not even the most daring liberal or socialist!
2. he is targeting his tax increases solely at "boogey men" - corporations and the "ultra-rich"

But, don't be fooled: it's still "tax and spend" liberalism!

@calatar said in Biden: "“It’s time we remembered that ‘We the people’ are the government.":

@bi4smooth Really interesting seeing your post - and I largely agree with you about your concern.

I do think though that we have had so many years of quantitative easing - without - the corresponding increase in inflation everyone was expecting... that we are likely looking at an update to how economics thinks about the topic. There are, of course, many reasons for this lack of inflation... but it is interesting to see that the vast supply of money that's coming in hasn't even remotely moved inflation.

Do you know of Mark Blithe? His book on austerity is well worth a read. And he has some pretty convincing ideas about why inflation is not happening ATM. Worth looking out a few of his lectures on YouTube if you are interested (and haven't already seen them!).

The term "quantitative easing" came from the 2008 fiscal crisis. The term was used for when the Bush administration realized that the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers and the essential "vanishing" of huge sums of money OUT of our economy had to be "replaced", or things would potentially continue to collapse. That cash infusion did not work as expected - because it was "given" to the major banks - with the understanding that they would "loan" it out to "prop up" the economy. That did NOT happen: the cash wasn't used by the banks for loans - it was used (almost entirely) to "prop up" the cash basis of the banks, show "fake" improvements in their "profitability", and then proffer huge bonuses to the bank executives for miraculously saving the institutions!

The continuation of adding "cash" into the economy can be largely used to explain the US economy's unrivaled run of success (expansion - with minimal inflation) from 2009/2010 through the 1st quarter of 2020 (e.g. until the pandemic). This "slow growth" approach was experimental, but proved to be exceptionally successful!

However, the lack of inflation can be pretty-easily traced to the fact that the "cash infusions" through this time were relatively small. Unlike the THREE lump-sum payments of the covid-relief plans - which were not small, they were HUGE! The first two were demonstrably needed due to economic contractions similar to the fiscal crisis in 2007/2008. And, this time we learned: we didn't send the cash to the banks, we sent it directly to the people (who promptly SPENT it - exactly what was needed!)

The need for the 3rd (and largest) "infusion" (aka: stimulus check) was less obvious, but time will tell if it was "too much too fast"... but the early signs are that there are inflationary signs... significant ones. In the real-estate, home-building, auto-making, and dozens of other industries. Some can be attributed to short-term supply-chain issues, but all at once?

If Biden gets his way, and the Federal Gov't pumps another $2-4T into this economy, I think we're in for a bumpy ride...

BTW: I read recently where Warren Buffet is warning people about possible inflation. Mind you, that doesn't make me (or him) right - but I'm not embarrassed to have come to the same conclusion as arguably the most successful investor of all time....

@lololulu19 said in Biden: "“It’s time we remembered that ‘We the people’ are the government.":

@storytellerd True.. a balanced budget is not realistic... but neither is pissing away $6 trillion in 3 months on PORK.

To be clear: $2T is already gone - out the door!

The other $4T are in 2 separate packages that one can only hope are "pie in the sky" numbers posited solely to come down from ... that is, I certainly hope this is just a bargaining tactic... (I want to spend $1T, so let's ask for $2T and see where we can get from there!)

BTW: It seems that @lololulu19 and I agree about something! He must be turning into a liberal!

@lololulu19 said in Scalise says he was 'shocked' when the FBI erased political motive behind GOP shooting:

@bi4smooth What a load of manure.. the FBI most certainly do not have any interest whatsoever in telemarketers.

You really don't have the mental capacity to see that I was talking about 2 different things?

For your information: the FBI doesn't investigate telemarketers, the FCC does... I don't refer the telemarketers to the FBI for prosecution, just for the fun of it!

Still, if only I'd left a clue that one might not have been related to the other... I don't know, something like: "I cannot share the details..."

I think I'll start referring to @lololulu19 as "scarecrow"....

So I'm not going to include your post here - it would make everything too lengthy... besides, people can scroll up.

Firstly, understand that macro-economics is the study of how masses of people make decisions about money. In other words, it's wildly complex and speculative!

As for the Brookings Institute's paper from 18 years ago, understand that the same Brooking Institute published other papers back then that turned out to be completely true! It's the nature of the business!

In a way, it's like the people who "predicted" that the Tampa Bay Rays would win the American League in 2020... Now that it happened, they seem like geniuses! But in Sports, we know better! They know were just lucky!

Economists (or, more correctly, Macro-Economists) are like sports bettors! (Which is something I said in my earlier post - when I said their ability to predict the future was less than weather forecasters! I'm not talking about the weather-man predicting rain today (that's actually not so hard - in weather OR economics!) ... but about the forecasts of things like "this will a really bad hurricane season" or "this will be a mild hurricane season")

So the problem we have (you and I) is that we're not arguing about the same thing... I'm not so much talking about Gov't deficits causing inflation... at least not that alone!

The problem is that people think of our economy as-if it were like a swimming pool: With only 4 people in the pool, there is plenty of room for everyone to swim, and when the water gets a little low, we can put a hose in and re-fill it.

But pools aren't that simple... some of the swimmers bring friends (now there are more swimmers, but the same amount of water)... some of the swimmers pee in the pool (meaning we need to add chemicals and add a pool filter to keep everyone healthy & free to swim)... and sometimes it rains or it gets really hot (which changes how much and how often we need to add - or remove - water to keep everyone happy).

In the case of macro-economics, people often think of it as a pool - even with the added complexities - except that our economic "pool" has to GROW (and, possibly shrink) as more (or fewer) "swimmers" enter (or exit) the economy.

In economic terms, my concern is the growth in the "Money Supply"

Think of it this way: if you consider our economy as a Monopoly game: when new players come along, if we don't ADD money to the game, eventually there's only $1 per player... and there can't be much of an "economy" because, while there may be $1 million in the "game" and 1 million players, they will not each have exactly $1! That kind of order doesn't exist in any real universe! No, some players will have $1000's, while others have $0...

Now, if you add $10k to the game for each user as they join, but not by giving it to the new user, but rather by just adding it to the "bank" (which, in Monopoly is the "money supply"), things get interesting...

Indeed, I'm going to stop here and suggest you try the following:

• Play monopoly with some of your friends, but change some things:
  Start with 1/2 the startup cash, and 1/2 the money in the bank (but leave the prices of everything else the same)... in other words, the same game with 1/2 the money supply.
• For more fun, adjust the game 1 more time: all properties are sold at auction. When you land on a property, you can purchase it for the listed price... BUT another player can offer more money for that property, and steal it from you by agreeing to pay more than you're willing to pay for it!
• Now replay that game, but start with 5x the cash to start, and 5x the amount of money in the bank!

It's not that prices go up - that's too obvious! The thing to look at is the behavior of the players! Some players will "adjust" to the fact that $1 in the last game is equivalent to just $0.20 in the earlier one... but the majority will not! They will see that they have more money and will spend "wildly" - so a property they'd only pay $350 for in the first game will be "worth" $2000 or even $3000 in the later one - because they have it! Even though mathematically the equivalent price is just $1750!

NOTE: To be useful, your players can't be told that they're playing with a reduced or expanded "money supply"... they just need to play as-is, without knowledge of the changes you've made.... like "typical" people in an economy!

@sroicram said in Novo aqui:

Alguém pode me explicar como funciona esse fórum?? Como posso estar baixando vídeos??

From translate.google.com:
Can someone explain to me how this forum works ?? How can I be downloading videos ??

So the Forum here (https://community.gaytorrent.ru) is not where you download files. That site is actually at https://www.gaytorrent.ru/

But understand that this site doesn't share porn files directly - it's more of an indirect method:

When you download a file from this site, you are downloading a TORRENT file (really... the file "extension" is .torrent!)

You then load this .torrent file into a torrent-client program (like qBitTorrent - my favorite, or uTorrent, or Deluge, or loads of other options).

That program (your Torrent Client Program) will then try to "join" you to a "torrent swarm" - or just "swarm" - that is: a group of computers downloading and uploading the same file (or collection of files). Those files would be the files described in the .torrent file.

Computers in a “swarm” transfer data between each other without the need for a central server. ... In other words, you will download the .torrent file from the site (also called the "tracker" - because it helps to "manage" -or at least identify- the other members of the swarm), but you do not download a single byte of the actual file(s) from the tracker server!

Indeed, everyone downloading a torrent is copying data directly from other users on the Internet! They are also supposed to be uploading the same torrent - that is: sharing. And people who have download all of the content already, but still upload to other members of the swarm are called seeders.

In general, for a torrent to work, there needs to be at least 1 seeder (at least 1 user with all of the contents).

Now, since you posted in Spanish, I'll re-translate my reply into Spanish:

===

Ahora, ya que publicaste en español, volveré a traducir mi respuesta al español:

Entonces, el Foro aquí (https://community.gaytorrent.ru) no es el lugar donde descarga archivos. Ese sitio está en https://www.gaytorrent.ru/

Pero comprenda que este sitio no comparte archivos pornográficos directamente, es más un método indirecto:

Cuando descarga un archivo de este sitio, está descargando un archivo TORRENT (en realidad ... ¡la "extensión" del archivo es .torrent!)

Luego carga este archivo .torrent en un programa cliente de torrent (como qBitTorrent, mi favorito, uTorrent, o Deluge, o muchas otras opciones).

Ese programa (su Programa Cliente Torrent) intentará "unirse" a usted a un "enjambre de torrent" - o simplemente "enjambre" - es decir: un grupo de computadoras descargando y cargando el mismo archivo (o colección de archivos). Esos archivos serían los archivos descritos en el archivo .torrent.

Las computadoras en un "enjambre" transfieren datos entre sí sin la necesidad de un servidor central. ... En otras palabras, descargará el archivo .torrent del sitio (también llamado "rastreador", porque ayuda a "administrar" -o al menos identificar- a los otros miembros del enjambre), pero no descargue un solo byte del archivo (s) actual (s) del servidor de seguimiento!

De hecho, ¡todos los que descargan un torrent están copiando datos directamente de otros usuarios en Internet! También se supone que están cargando el mismo torrent, es decir: compartir. Y las personas que ya han descargado todo el contenido, pero aún lo han subido a otros miembros del enjambre, se denominan sembradoras.

En general, para que un torrent funcione, debe haber al menos 1 sembrador (al menos 1 usuario con todo de los contenidos).

@dvt said in THIS or THAT: the game:

@andergarcia

Def inside

Morning sex or late night sex?

Late-night sex followed-by morning-sex!

cum multiple times a day/week (multiple smaller loads)
-or-
save up for one big load?

@storytellerd said in Biden: "“It’s time we remembered that ‘We the people’ are the government.":

@bi4smooth I would say it is doubtful that this level of spending will cause high inflation let alone hyperinflation. I find excess demand for something is rarely what causes inflation although the inflation in the '70s was from oil prices because of disruption in supply. Usually, it is just a company raising its profit margins or wall street speculating on commodities that causes inflation.

I've been waiting 20 years for high inflation and skyrocketing interest rates that economists freak out about. I haven't seen them yet. I think most economists don't know what they are talking about if I am quite honest.

I don't know what economists you talk to - I have dinner with some PhD, tenured professors from time-to-time, and I haven't heard my friends worry about inflation since the mid '90s... until the early Obama years (which they claim didn't happen because the banks "swallowed" the huge cash infusion instead of putting it "into" the economy).

Now, in my experience economics professors' prognostication skills are demonstrably worse than meteorologists

Still, while I'm not laying awake at night over it, I am making directed investments to protect myself should inflation take hold...

BTW:

• Have you looked at real estate prices lately? Here in Fla, homes sell in less than a week - for full asking price, if not higher!
• Or car prices? Dealerships are getting full sticker prices for popular new cars and trucks! People who "want a deal" are being turned away - because the next guy in the door will pay full price, and inventories are low!

@vagelis said in How many times do you jerk off in a week?:

@hottie124 once to twice a week. I dunno if I want to be like those guys doing it at least once a day or no.. lol. I wonder what it feels like...

Masturbation doesn't ruin my day, because it invariably ends my day...

@titoteq said in Saying Hiiiiiiieeee:

@harry69
Naaah 6 inches girth is average

Girth is measured in CIRCUMFERENCE, not just measuring across...

Measure length by placing the end of the ruler/tape at the top of the penis where it juts out from the torso... where the tip is, that's the length...

Measure girth by wrapping the tape (no ruler here) around the "thickest" part of the penis. Measure 1 time around...

BTW: This is much more fun - and you wind up with higher numbers (at least I do) when you do this with someone else!!

@storytellerd said in Biden: "“It’s time we remembered that ‘We the people’ are the government.":

@lololulu19 Having a balanced budget is not a good idea right now. The federal debt is our money supply. There are specific cases you might want to reduce the money supply but just having a "balanced budget" is not one of them.

We haven't had a "balanced" budget since Clinton - and Obama's reckless spending was only outdone by Trump's! -- that is, until Biden came along...

It remains to be seen how much of Biden's wet-dream-list of spending will ever see the light of day, but you can't fault him for one thing: the bitch dreams big!

Unfortunately, as we've discussed here: while the Gov't literally can just print more money, it results in inflation pressures... and usually when that "breaks", it breaks hard...

Buckle your seatbelts, campers... if Biden and the Dems actually get -- even half -- of this wanton cash infusion into the books, we'll see inflation like we haven't seen since the 1970's!

@lololulu19 said in Simpsons recast another character:

@bi4smooth Apparently you failed to read RaphJD's post. Allow me to paraphrase it:
"He liked the show until it changed it's content including who performed the voices, the subject matter, and it's tone"

I don't think it's such a good marketing move when a LOT of people have abandoned the show because of their becoming WOKE.

Some other examples of WOKE products and entertainment which have permanently turned me off to them: Coke products; Delta; anything Disney; CNN; MSNBC; CBS; NBC; ABC; Robert De Niro; Rob Reiner; Roseanne show spinoff; The View; NBA; NFL; Facebook; Twitter; Youtube; all Hollywood movies

LOL - the recent ratings SPIKE for The Simpsons would seem to tell a different story...
NEWS FLASH - they're not after older, politically staid viewers... they're trying to "renew" their viewership with younger viewers...

But you keep wrapping yourself in that conspiracy blanket ... it seems to keep your warm and cozy at night... and that's fine by me! I just wish you'd stop trying to get me (or anyone else) to fall for the same lies...

I'm going to stop watching this thread -- and go back to my breakfast of ground up children and deep-state lies!

@lololulu19 said in Scalise says he was 'shocked' when the FBI erased political motive behind GOP shooting:

@raphjd According to the FBI... there was a loud bang during a game and someone was injured. Ho Hum.

FBI always has been dirty. They don't serve the public.. they serve their own political agendas. For instance.. there have been a couple of times several years ago when I had important information that the FBI should have investigated.. however. there is NO WAY to contact them! Impossible! The best you can do is SEND them information via snail mail, but they will not respond, nor acknowledge they even got it.

I am not permitted to share details - but you are wrong. I have personally made reports to the FBI that were investigated and resulted in criminal charges being filed.

Not only that, I routinely ask telemarketers to call me back "on my land line" - and give them the phone number of the nearby FBI Field Office and tell them to ask for "Spic"...