Depends on the test. There's more than one testing protocol, and they detect different things at different sensitivities.
A viral test will not show a false positive from vaccination.
An antibody test may show a false positive from vaccination.
See: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/facts.html
Geez, where to begin?
It's amazing that you're an experienced martial artist with real-life knife skills, trained by police trainers in firearms and tasers, and a danger-zone diplomat to boot. Yet, you have time to write lengthy reubttals anonymously on a gay-torrent forum? Color me skeptical. Everything you say about your expertise sounds suspect. If you'd like to prove your claims, I'm happy to retract and apologize, but for now, you sound like the 98 million other forum-dwelling trolls who claim omnicompetence about every aspect of an argument as a way of avoiding inconvenient facts about the matter.
National news correspondents and law-enforcement commentators on television and in print have asserted that the officer's response was justified. (See: https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/crime/2021/04/22/columbus-police-shooting-makhia-bryant-appears-lawful/7318300002/). I suspect that part of the reason you claim omnicompetence about knives and guns and tasers is to pretend that your plucked-from-the-air assertions are just as valid as the documented, broad consensus among real experts that the officer reacted appropriately and according to training.
The socioeconomic status question is absolutely relevant. Police use-of-force incidents are a response to something -- i.e., criminal behavior wherein officers have legitimate fear of being attacked or killed. And in the United States and Canada, criminal behavior is strongly correlated to low socioeconomic status (see: https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/crime/rr06_6/p2.html). If we want to reduce use-of-force problems, we absolutely need to do something about police training, but we also need to do something about the cultural systems surrounding the people most likely to commit a crime. When people refuse to submit to apprehension or think that they'd rather go down swinging because it'll increase their street cred, the risk to officers increases -- and officers' incentive to prioritize their own safety also increases. You simply cannot look at this as a police-only situation and retain any sense of intellectual honesty.
Officers killed in the line of duty don't come from "organized crime" as you assert. FBI statistics for 2019 show 48 dying from felonious acts by criminals and 41 by on-the-job accidents. Of the 48, 15 relate to law-enforcement activities, 9 to tactical situations, 5 from unprovoked attacks, etc. See https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/fbi-releases-2019-statistics-on-law-enforcement-officers-killed-in-the-line-of-duty for more information.
I've never said police should stand down. From where do you source that mischaracterization?
I've also never said that I think nothing should be done. I have not outlined a comprehensive "If I were in charge" reform plan in this thread, nor do I think (at present) that such is useful for me to share. For now, I'm more interested in correcting the falsehoods about the Bryant shooting that everyone really, really, really wants to shy away from so they can shout from their generic anti-gun/anti-police soapboxes.
Sigh.
Eeeenteresting. I just did an elaborate experiment where I screenshot my on-site stats, cleared my totals and seeding torrents in uTorrent, grabbed five freeleech torrents, then let it run for a while. The on-site stats correctly credited the uploads and did not increment the downloads -- in other words, everything performed exactly as it should have.
So either things magically fixed themselves recently, or (much more likely) I paid insufficient attention to the stats earlier when I concluded that freeleech wasn't working.
@bi4smooth said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
from your viewpoint:
There is nothing wrong with the status quo - in fact, the police should "step it up a notch" because crime is "so bad"
Thus, I'm posing possible solutions to a problem you do not believe exists... and that is "a bridge too far"... to go on would be pointless.
Might i suggest you buy a bullet-proof vest... LOL
The reason "we will not agree here" is, indeed, fundamental -- you literally misconstrued everything I said and attribute opinions to me that I have not claimed for myself, and have -- in fact -- explicitly disclaimed earlier in the thread. It's clear that there's no point engaging with you; you've arrived at a caricature of what I've been saying that very obviously doesn't match the actual words I've typed in this thread. It's like you're deliberately lying about the plain text of things I've written because it's easier to argue with a straw man than with an actual human being.
@bi4smooth said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
So... let me get this right... it's OK in your world to shoot first and ask questions later if the person under suspicion is poor?
I never said that, or implied it, and it's dishonest of you to suggest to the contrary with a deliberately misleading question. Please read and engage with what I said before you respond with your panties in a bunch.
De-escalation is a nice idea, in theory. But it's not at all obvious that a unilateral stand-down by cops will suddenly make the world a better place. In fact, there's a ton of evidence that when police pull back, crime soars.
You're focusing on one side of the problem: police culture. I happen to agree that there are material defects in training and focus. But those defects are, at least in part, responsive to trends in criminal conduct. Police aren't getting aggressive for the fun of it. Unless and until there's an equal push by activists to reduce resistance to apprehension and break networks of criminality that pervades many low-income communities, unilateral "de-escalation" is simply another word for "crime wave."
@bi4smooth said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
Honestly, in today's policing, the answers here are a) and a)... and that is frightening!
I think that's a bit too blithe, though. You're acting as if a high-level principle is all we need. That's a dangerously naïve view. For example, if a cop encounters an enraged woman flashing a knife, what matters is the context of the individual situation. If the woman is standing alone in a parking lot and a half-dozen officers have encircled her and keep 10 paces of distance, there's zero need for lethal force. If a woman is five feet from another woman she's actively attacking -- as with the Bryant case -- and there's one officer approaching from a distance, that's a completely different calculation.
It's intellectually dishonest to suggest that a context-free one-sentence scenario requires a specific one-sentence outcome when you haven't made any accommodation whatsoever for the tactical situation.
And it's not as if the police have sole accountability here. In that litany of "say their name" people, most of them were lawfully detained for some reason, and the situation got out of hand when they resisted arrest. That's not to suggest that resisting arrest ought to be addressed by lethal force, but it is to acknowledge that police go into a job with a reason to want to protect themselves. In 2018, law enforcement as a profession had a annual fatality rate of 13.7 per 100,000 workers -- the 16th most dangerous profession in the United States (see: https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/money/2020/01/24/25-most-dangerous-jobs-in-america/41041127/). And that's with all the SWAT teams, body armor, and overwhelming responses. What do you think is the most likely outcome if U.S. cops act like British constables? Like it or not, the evidence is strongly suggestive that low socioeconomic status correlates strongly with criminal behavior and with resistance to apprehension. You can't just focus on the "supply" side of the argument (police violence) without accounting for the "demand" side (criminality with specific U.S. characteristics that don't easily map to other advanced countries).
@calatar said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
@jsl76 I was replying to you…
I actually teach a martial art… and one which uses knives. And no, I don’t teach my students that they’re going to get cut…
I’ve watched the video. I still think it is a complete failure of training and understanding that the officer ended up shooting an individual. Possibly also a failure of equipment.
For example, wouldn’t a taser be far more effective? Obviously not guaranteed to be non-lethal, but not as likely as a live round to kill.
By the by, I’m also firearms trained by a police force (the fun of being a diplomat in hostile countries!).
My instructor (who is an instructor for uechi-ryu karate, BJJ, krav maga, and escrima) and the various instructors who visit our dojo are pretty consistent that if you're going to be engaged in knife defense, you should assume you will be cut. There's a lot of reasons to teach that approach; you may find some value in exploring the question on behalf of your students. It's not obvious that knife defense without a presumption of injury makes a ton of sense -- because when they're injured, their reaction to the attack is compromised if they're not prepped for it -- but to each his own.
It's also not obvious that in the 10 seconds from arrival to gunshot, that the officer had any opportunity to strategize an alternative solution. I don't know how he could have deployed a taser in time, to be honest. It's standard training for most U.S.-based police forces to shoot to kill if a person is wielding a deadly weapon. People can disagree, legitimately, as to whether this approach is better or worse. But if you accept that this is the standard training, I don't see how we could expect the officer to do anything other than what he did.
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.
@chanelkokoro said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
I had to go back and check because sometimes you guys say bs so confidently, I was like did I miss something? How can you blame me for not watching a video you didn't even link? My thoughts are based on what I've read about the case. If there is some kind of video floating around that you believe justifies this shooting why don't you share it?
You just hurt my feelings bro.
Maybe I just needed more information, jeez. "factuals" and "counterfactuals" what kind of pretentious... What are you even talking about? If you don't want to defend your argument just say so, don't make it seem like there's a problem with my intelligence.
Why the mean girl energy, Regina George??
Well, if you're incapable of Googling "Bryant video" and you don't know what basic terms of argumentation actually mean, maybe there is a problem with your intelligence? I'm not obligated to spoon-feed facts to someone who's spouted off several times without bothering to do even basic research. Being informed is your job, sugarplum.
@chanelkokoro said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
@jsl76
pffft, I'm not trolling, I am asking you to envision a situation in which the girl may have been completely justified in holding that knife. I didn't realize I was asking too much by sharing a personal story and asking you to think a little bit, my bad.
If it was okay to kill people based on potentialities all of us would be dead by now.
Did you watch the video? It seems you want to weigh in on leftist talking points without acutally apprehending the facts in the case. I'm not interested in debating counterfactuals with someone who hasn't even mastered the factuals. But thanks for playing.
@chanelkokoro said in Teenage knife fights are no big deal, say liberals:
I once pulled out a knife on my own father, because he violated a restraining order and came to my mom's house to do her and me harm. This is the same man who on another occasion used an axe to break down my mother's bedroom door, who took all of our china and set it on fire in the back yard, who broke my mother's nose and pushed her down a flight of stairs. I went to the kitchen and grabbed a serrated steak knife because I was scared and needed something to protect myself with. Had the police in this story had seen me I'm the one who would've been shot dead, are you saying I would've deserved it?
I have said nothing of the sort; I've very deliberately crafted my replies to speak only to the Bryant case. But good game, bro, on the attempt to troll.
@calatar Again, check the video. Please don't reply to me unless you're actually replying to me.
I will say that as someone who's a martial-arts student, we're taught that the first rule of knife fighting is "You're going to get cut." It's simply not plausible given the video of the Bryant case that the girl in pink would have walked away unscathed if the officer had taken his time and tried alternative modes of de-escalation.
It's not obvious why you continue to drone on about this subject when you haven't displayed even a cursory knowledge of the facts on the ground.
@raphjd Yes, I understand how the system works. But what I'm saying is that active freeleeches always count against my download rate even while the freeleech period is open. I've never seen the D/L rate stay the same and the U/L rate increase on a freeleech, ever.
If you want, I can take screenshots of the phenomenon.
FWIW, I never bother with freeleech because 100 percent of the time, my traffic/ratio acts as if the torrent weren't freeleech.
@calatar Check the video, dude. The officer had fewer than 10 seconds from arriving on scene to shooting to make a decision, and in this case, the use of force was surely justified. Had this happened in London, the girl in pink would have been severely wounded or killed. In America, the knife-wielding attacker was killed. I prefer our solution to that of our cousins across the pond, IMO. No one wants to see ANYONE killed by anyone for any reason, but your comments demonstrate you haven't performed even the most cursory review of the Bryant scene.
@raphjd Well, $6T in new spending proposed in 100 days comes to something like $18k per head. That kind of cash buys a lot of bread and circuses.
@oxala00 said in best "duplicate finder" for image & video?:
fslint
I am a fan of dupeGuru, which supports fuzzy matching that should help with crops and overlays. It doesn't work on videos, but it does work on still images.
I think @bi4smooth nailed it, with the NAS option. I use a four-bay NAS in a RAID5 setup and love it.
That said, 2 TB of space on Google Drive is US$10/mo. If I ever used a stand-alone local drive that wasn't in a RAID array, I'd sync all the contents to a cloud service.
Funny thing about Google Drive, they don't seem to care about having copyrighted content, but they DO care if a hash match pops up on a DMCA request and you are actively sharing that content.
