Comment On The Exemption Pass

Originally posted to the sidebar by "compaqdrew"... [expand full text]
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6Next »

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 08:35 • by Alasdair (unregistered)
202016 in reply to 201986
Loki:
Sharper Observer:

You are both wrong.
The correct spelling is GREY.
GRAY is a common American misspelling, not English.


GRAY is the correct spelling, and deliveries are made by TRUCKS, and electricity is generated by ALTERNATORS or GENERATORS, and and a HOOD covers the engine compartment of a car, and the "Queen's English" is a dialect spoken only in West Hollywood, and you get a drink in a BAR, and we smoke cigarettes, we don't "suck fags" (again, with the exception of West Hollywood) - and we have bailed your ass out for the last time (see WWI and WWII), asshole...


I'm not even going to start on the whole "correct" British/American English thing but...

Some people say cigarettes, some say fags, but I don't think anyone would say they "suck fags" unless they were being particularly crude in announcing their homosexuality.

As for "bailing our asses out"... you may not like Hollywood dialects but you sure seem fond of their version of history.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 09:13 • by santa (unregistered)
real wtf is nobody started selling these... WHERE'S THE AMERICAN DREAM IN THAT?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 09:24 • by real_aardvark
202027 in reply to 201975
webhamster:

In fact, I am <Canadian>.

I also know for a fact that at least our school made accepting the recommendation optional. You could choose to write it if you wanted to try and bump up your grade. The teachers would calculate your grade and go with whichever was highest, meaning you wouldn't get punished from what you would have had if you chose to write and blew it.
They had a similar system at Oxford when I was there.

It sounds like a great idea, but in practice, everybody who went for the option of the "extra paper on my special subject" ended up with a worse degree than they would otherwise have.

The reason? They were so fanatical about their "special subject" that they turned into werewolf-like creatures, prowling the libraries at night and grunting menacingly at anybody who dared to distract them with normal conversation.

By the time they got to the actual exams, they were beyond hope: shambling, unkempt figures with dull red eyes and shaky hands, brought on no doubt by the quart of vodka per day they had to neck just to keep within drooling distance of this side of sane.

Needless to say, their actual exam results went to shit. I had one friend who lost twenty pounds in a week on this lifestyle -- no mean feat, since he was the skinniest bloke in the year in the first place.

Of course, the fact that I have since adopted this modus operandi in my subsequent "career" is neither here nor there.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 09:39 • by A Person (unregistered)
202033 in reply to 202012
Because it makes you a socially-inept loser?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 09:49 • by real_aardvark
202035 in reply to 201993
AdT:
Jeopardy!

What is the Fourteenth Amendment?
Something altogether different, for three reasons.

(1) Being the meat in the sandwich, as it were, of the three "Reconstruction" amendments, it refers specifically to "no State shall..." Note the absence of restriction on Federal powers.

(2) For exactly the same reason, it prescribes the rights it defines as for "All persons born or naturalized in the United States." Fuck you if you're a wet-back, then.

(3) Interestingly enough, it quotes the holy rights trinity as "life, liberty, or property." You will note if you examine Jefferson's original draft and corrections of the Declaration that somebody (presumably Tom-boy) thought that "property" was insufficient and substituted "the pursuit of happiness."

This raises all sort of interesting questions. Are ex-slaves constitutionally incapable of happiness? Did the egregious Jefferson shy away from the word "property" because only Virginian gentlemen and the like are entitled to property and ordinary common muckers have to be content with "the pursuit of happiness?" (A very tricky pursuit in any case, in my experience.) Did the drafters of this amendment just have a brain-fart?

I don't, myself, hold with the constitutional doctrine of originalism owing, in large part, to precisely this sort of muddled expression.

Now, as to whether "rights" can be expressed in (the American remnants of) common law, or in some miraculous emergent expression of the Declaration of Independence, well, no, I don't think they can. That, I submit, is what the bulk of the Constitution (and certainly the vast plurality of the amendments thereto) constitutes. If it ain't in there, it ain't a right.

Of course, you could be referring to the Fourteenth Amendment to the Irish Constitution -- which isn't exactly pro-life, is it?

Addendum (2008-06-24 10:02):
Postscript to (1): no restriction on individual powers, either. Which is where the police (conceptually -- I've got no truck with this 'police state' bullshit) come in. The Fourteenth Amendment doesn't apply where the State has "plausible deniability." Which, unless it trains State Troopers to shoot any nigger driving a cadillac, it will have.

This isn't just nit-picking, btw. Just look at the last ten years or so of the Feds arbitrarily confiscating the property of suspected drug-smugglers, et al, with no judicial process whatsoever.

The downside of States Rights (is there an upside?) is that, if you fight a fucking silly Civil War centered on the principle, you can expect the constitutional amendments subsequent to when you lose to be made in precisely those same idiotic terms.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 10:20 • by Someone You Know
202057 in reply to 202035
real_aardvark:
If it ain't in there, it ain't a right.


Just playing devil's advocate here: doesn't that contradict the ninth amendment, which states that the enumeration of rights in the Constitution can't be held as a denial of other rights?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 10:41 • by Isolationist (unregistered)
202070 in reply to 202035
real_aardvark:

(2) For exactly the same reason, it prescribes the rights it defines as for "All persons born or naturalized in the United States." Fuck you if you're a wet-back, then.


You're right, fuck you to all the wet-backs. Anyone who didn't come here through legal means has no rights because they are by definition already criminals. Anyone who wants to defend them can join them in jail and deportation, too.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 10:53 • by real_aardvark
202077 in reply to 202070
Isolationist:
real_aardvark:

(2) For exactly the same reason, it prescribes the rights it defines as for "All persons born or naturalized in the United States." Fuck you if you're a wet-back, then.


You're right, fuck you to all the wet-backs. Anyone who didn't come here through legal means has no rights because they are by definition already criminals. Anyone who wants to defend them can join them in jail and deportation, too.
(a) Very well-disguised sarcasm
(b) I'll just phone my mate in the Datoka Nations, then. What was your email address again?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 11:19 • by real_aardvark
202093 in reply to 202057
Someone You Know:
real_aardvark:
If it ain't in there, it ain't a right.


Just playing devil's advocate here: doesn't that contradict the ninth amendment, which states that the enumeration of rights in the Constitution can't be held as a denial of other rights?
You can hardly play devil's advocate if you make a sensible contribution to the discussion.

There are at least two arguments here (I thought of two more, but then I got drunk and tired):

(1)Ad hominem: James Madison was an utter prick. A wannabe Jefferson, who even managed to choose an utter prick as his hero. Probably the most disastrous US President in the first half of the nineteenth century. In this case, I quote: "It has been objected also against a Bill of Rights, that, by enumerating particular exceptions to the grant of power, it would disparage those rights which were not placed in that enumeration; and it might follow by implication, that those rights which were not singled out, were intended to be assigned into the hands of the General Government, and were consequently insecure. This is one of the most plausible arguments I have ever heard against the admission of a bill of rights into this system; but, I conceive, that it may be guarded against. I have attempted it, as gentlemen may see by turning to the last clause of the fourth resolution."

Emphasis mine. Madison, like the other authors of the Federalist Papers, was a bleating moron. You do not "assign" rights into the hands of the General Government (read: Feds).

I contend that Madison's problem was that he didn't understand the force of "separation of powers," (not unreasonable, since nobody had tried it, and, as I say, he was a mental midget), and that he really wasn't sure that the Constitution would provide a comprehensive and acceptable definition of "rights."

I can't blame him for that, either. But he was mostly deluded.
(1a) The ninth amendment has nothing to do with either the construction of, or the interpretation of, the fourteenth amendment; despite Griswold v. Connecticut.
(2) Judgement: Douglas wrote that, "The Ninth Amendment obviously does not create federally enforceable rights." Of course, he then went on to make the senile assertion that the Fourteenth Amendment protects a woman's right to have an abortion, which is absurd on so many levels that I'd be running out of pixels before I'd finished enumerating them. His important point was that "as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy"

The question then arises: what are the consequences of the reservation of rights to the people?

That's been the big issue for the last fo
rty years or so. All we've seen above is arguments about "the rights" of the people. You can whine all you like, but unless they're in the Constitution and enshrined in the Full Majesty Of The Law (and also backed up by the ability to pay for laywers), they ain't worth dick-shit.

To return your devil's advocacy -- under the Ninth Amendment (and given subsequent Supreme Court rulings thereon), what exactly does "reservations of rights" mean?

Addendum (2008-06-24 11:40):
On point (2), where Douglas accepts the concept of "reservations of rights" from the Ninth Amendment as an argument for alowing abortion (under various limits), the old sod got it right. It was referred upward from the District Court. If the Supreme Court isn't there to take those judgements and anaylyse them under the "rights" microscope of the Constitution, then what the fuck is it there for?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 11:57 • by Someone You Know
202116 in reply to 202093
real_aardvark:
You can hardly play devil's advocate if you make a sensible contribution to the discussion.

There are at least two arguments here (I thought of two more, but then I got drunk and tired):

...etc.


You make several interesting points, real_aardvark, but I find that Real Life™ has intervened and I don't have time to get into them just now. I'll be back later.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 12:15 • by real_aardvark
202122 in reply to 202116
Someone You Know:
real_aardvark:
You can hardly play devil's advocate if you make a sensible contribution to the discussion.

There are at least two arguments here (I thought of two more, but then I got drunk and tired):

...etc.


You make several interesting points, real_aardvark, but I find that Real Life™ has intervened and I don't have time to get into them just now. I'll be back later.

This is the wrong website to discuss this stuff, isn't it? I just realised that.

(It's easy to miss.)

I'm not used to actual discussion on this site (except intermittently), but please go ahead.

Failing that, insult me and my pet pigs like everyone else would.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 12:41 • by ChrisPUT (unregistered)
202135 in reply to 201813
Pro-American:

If I were a cop, I would pull my gun on EVERYBODY until I had them secured at the back of the car in handcuffs. Then I would discuss their broken taillight. You can't be too careful and police officers shouldn't be forced to risk their lives unnecessarily for your wrongdoings.


Boy, I'm glad you're not a cop. I got pulled over once and my driver side window had been replaced with duct tape and plastic so I could not roll it down; plus my starter was busted so I couldn't shut my car off. I was dead tired and was just trying to make it up the next hill so that I could stop and rest (needed the hill to pop the clutch) He thought I was drunk and pulled me over.

To avoid confusion I opened my door, swung my legs out and placed my arms palm up on my legs with my head hanging down. I was trying to be as un-threatening as possible.
I guess it worked. I told the cop that I was going to park as soon as I was up the hill and he let me go.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 13:43 • by The Fuzz (unregistered)
202153 in reply to 201813
Pro-American:


If I were a cop, I would pull my gun on EVERYBODY until I had them secured at the back of the car in handcuffs. Then I would discuss their broken taillight. You can't be too careful and police officers shouldn't be forced to risk their lives unnecessarily for your wrongdoings.


You wouldn't last long.

As a police officer, I can agree that we shouldn't "be forced" to risk our lives. That being said, no one forced me or anyone I work with to be a police officer.

Your mentality is what gets certain officers on the evening news. We are public servants that have a responsibility not only to our families and ourselves but to the public.

You can not pull your gun on everybody as you so eloquently illustrated. There is a thing called the 4th amendment that protects people from illegal search and seizure. There is also a thing called "probable cause" that is required to make an arrest.

Pulling your gun on someone, placing them in handcuffs, and "securing" them constitutes an arrest. There is such a thing as "investigative detention"; however, it usually does not involve force. Using a firearm (even if it is not fired), is a use of force. On top of everything else, doing all that to "discuss their broken taillight" could land you in federal court.

I make sure that I come home to my family every night. However, I also make sure that I don't trample on the civil rights of the general public to get there. Just imagine if your grandmother was the one getting pulled over. Insert her into your equation and then tell me if you think it is a good idea.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 13:46 • by Penn (unregistered)
The real WTF is someone cut off the last part of the story:

So I get up to leave and the Exemption Lady says, "By the way, what is the name of the class you got an Exemption for?"

I turn around slowly and say "The Aristocrats."

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 15:13 • by Survey User 2338 (unregistered)
This thread proves that education is no substitution for intelligence.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 15:14 • by xybre
202189 in reply to 201922
Atario:
Pro-American:
If I were a cop, I would pull my gun on EVERYBODY until I had them secured at the back of the car in handcuffs. Then I would discuss their broken taillight.
Too bad you're not a cop. Because that kind of abuse of power would quickly get you locked up, and we'd all be rid of you.


I think this points out how in "The Land of the Free", we are (encouraged to be) slaves to fear.

I've lived in rural areas, where everyone is suspicious of city-folk, suburbs where everyone is suspicious of people who dress differently, and cities where everyone is suspicious of everyone.

There are signs all over the city saying "if you see anything strange, or anyone acting strange, call the cops". Security theater is rampant, all it does is make people feel like someone is in control, because they sure as hell know it's not them.

"I believe that the truth of the matter is far more terrifying, that the real truth that dare not speak itself is that no one is in control, absolutely no one. This stuff is ruled by the equations of dynamics and chaos. There may be entities seeking control, but to seek control is to take enormous aggravation upon yourself. It's like trying to control a dream." - Terence McKenna

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 15:56 • by real_aardvark
202202 in reply to 202188
Survey User 2338:
This thread proves that education is no substitution for intelligence.
Plz send teh Intelligences...

No, wait a minute. The State Department tried that in 2003, and it didn't work, did it?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 16:31 • by Johnny Canuck (unregistered)
202207 in reply to 201931
[quote user="NutherCanuck"][quote user="FredSaw"][quote user="Johnny Canuck"]As an honour roll student, I wound up writing one (mandatory) English final in my last year. A good friend of mine, who was not a good student, didn't get any recommends. He was the one who pointed out the unfairness inherent.[/quote]I fail to see inherent unfairness. At the beginning of the class, did you two stand the same chance of succeeding?[/quote]

Let me try to explain it as simply as I can. Let us suppose my friend and I are of equal ability in English. (The mandatory exam.) As the English final approaches, classes end as exams start. As I am a good student in math, science and so on, English is the only final I have to write. As he is not as good, he will be writing many exams.

I now have 2 weeks to devote to studying for the final English exam. However, my friend has to devote his study time to many different subjects. As a result, he has only two days to study for English.

Given that we were equal in English ability throughout the year (getting near identical marks on all assignments and papers) it should surprise no one that I ace the final exam, while he does not since he didn't have the same amount of time to prepare. And since the final exam is a majority of the mark, we now have vastly different English marks.

The unfairness is that when one looks at transcripts, one will assume I am far superior in English. While in reality, my English mark is actually due to the fact that I am superior in math & science and it's very likely my friend is at least my equal if not better.

That's why it's "unfair".

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 16:53 • by real_aardvark
202211 in reply to 202207
Johnny Canuck:
FredSaw:
Johnny Canuck:
As an honour roll student, I wound up writing one (mandatory) English final in my last year. A good friend of mine, who was not a good student, didn't get any recommends. He was the one who pointed out the unfairness inherent.
I fail to see inherent unfairness. At the beginning of the class, did you two stand the same chance of succeeding?


Let me try to explain it as simply as I can. Let us suppose my friend and I are of equal ability in English. (The mandatory exam.) As the English final approaches, classes end as exams start. As I am a good student in math, science and so on, English is the only final I have to write. As he is not as good, he will be writing many exams.

I now have 2 weeks to devote to studying for the final English exam. However, my friend has to devote his study time to many different subjects. As a result, he has only two days to study for English.

Given that we were equal in English ability throughout the year (getting near identical marks on all assignments and papers) it should surprise no one that I ace the final exam, while he does not since he didn't have the same amount of time to prepare. And since the final exam is a majority of the mark, we now have vastly different English marks.

The unfairness is that when one looks at transcripts, one will assume I am far superior in English. While in reality, my English mark is actually due to the fact that I am superior in math & science and it's very likely my friend is at least my equal if not better.

That's why it's "unfair".
There, fixed that for ya.

No soup for you. Though you still have to take the mandatory exam.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 18:05 • by Vee (unregistered)
"She was bald and overweight, with curly graying hair." Was she wearing a wig? Because she can't be bald and have curly graying hair on her head -- unless it was worn as a fringe around her head, like a monk .

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 18:13 • by vic (unregistered)
Bald means lacking hair on the scalp. The keyword here is scalp.

Also, "Pro-american" is a big curly-haired troll.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 18:18 • by Dude (unregistered)
202233 in reply to 202202
real_aardvark:
Plz send teh Intelligences...

No, wait a minute. The State Department tried that in 2003, and it didn't work, did it?


What the hell are you referring to? You expect everyone to think "gee, what a funny guy" when you just make something stupid like this up? You really are the biggest POS I've ever seen!

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-24 19:44 • by Ilya Ehrenburg (unregistered)
202252 in reply to 202233
Dude:
real_aardvark:
Plz send teh Intelligences...

No, wait a minute. The State Department tried that in 2003, and it didn't work, did it?


What the hell are you referring to? You expect everyone to think "gee, what a funny guy" when you just make something stupid like this up? You really are the biggest POS I've ever seen!

He's probably referring to the rather unreliable information the intelligence services delivered prior to the war with Iraq.
And, just to preclude wrong conclusions with respect to his standing on that war, he explicitly stated before that he supports it.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-25 03:26 • by donniel
202287 in reply to 201888
campkev:
Mel:
Not everyone reading or commenting here is in the US. Some people reading and commenting here are in a country where it's reasonable to assume that a cop won't shoot you. Hell, in New Zealand, cops (in general) don't even carry guns! In some countries, there's a thing called respect - which is more prevalent than gun-carrying. I'm glad I can choose to live in one of those countries.

If I'm stopped by police while I'm driving, I'll get out if I want to - or I might stay in the car (until asked to get out). I'm not in the US. My first thought isn't "He's going to shoot me if I do something wrong".


I'm in the U.S. and that's not my first thought either. Evidently some people have watched a few too many episodes of "The Shield"


I'm not from the US, but my first thought when somebody mentioned getting out of the car was "Don't, moron - you'll get shot!". I haven't watched 'The Shield', but I've watched a lot of 'World's Wildest Police Videos'.

Interesting and thought-provoking arguments from both sides of the debate.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-25 08:59 • by Query Object (unregistered)
202312 in reply to 201891
So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on them. ‘Give me five bees for a quarter,’ you’d say. Now where were we? Oh yeah, the important thing was that I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have any white onions, because of the war; the only thing you can get was those big yellow ones.


Thank you Abe.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-25 16:02 • by Andrzej Novak (unregistered)
202485 in reply to 201820
I guess I don't see the WTF. Do you think that 18 year olds should only be considered adults when they are committing crimes?


That and when they are fighting in the war. God forbid that real adults be required to fight them, rather than sending the nation's young 'uns out.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 04:29 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202572 in reply to 201913
nobis:
Ilya Ehrenburg:
But he was black, and didn't you read above that black people are ipso facto aggressive and threatening?
I was able to read that far into the OP. I can in fact tell you sir that I read no such comment about black people.
(yes I'm assuming you are a sir because your name means "son of Ilya")


Well, I believe it's taken from Latin:

"in our presence" or "to us"

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 08:31 • by Ilya Ehrenburg (unregistered)
202583 in reply to 202572
ClaudeSuck.de:
nobis:
Ilya Ehrenburg:
But he was black, and didn't you read above that black people are ipso facto aggressive and threatening?
I was able to read that far into the OP. I can in fact tell you sir that I read no such comment about black people.
(yes I'm assuming you are a sir because your name means "son of Ilya")


Well, I believe it's taken from Latin:

"in our presence" or "to us"

If you're referring to the origins of the name Ilya: from hebrew Eliyahu, my god is YHVH.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 09:11 • by Ass Monkey (unregistered)
The real WTF is that not only does this kid not know how to spell "aggression," he also doesn't know how to use quotation marks or a spell checker.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 15:48 • by Anon (unregistered)
Sounds a bit like my high school when they decided to print off the timetables for the whole year again.

However... we needed either ID, or a teachers signature on a slip of paper. I opted for the ID.

Went in, showed them my St John Ambulance ID (First Aid charity), and got lectured on how forging ID's was not on, and that I was lucky they were not calling the Police... (This was a really old receptionist)

Lets just say they got a roasting from the head teacher, I got my timetable, and no other establishment has rejected that piece of ID ;)

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 19:38 • by Demopoly (unregistered)
My mom, AKA BQFH, Satans Handmaiden, et al, one day early in my freshman year of HS decided she didn't want to get up or be bothered. She told me to just sign her name at school for being late. I was unusually honest even then, but when I got to school late (mom too drunk to drive wasn't an uncommon excuse) the elderly desk-matron just blinked as I signed my own name on the late slip. I continued to do so for the rest of HS without ever talking to my mom again, or ever getting a phone call.

I discovered at that moment that HS was operated by people who were too stupid, too old, or too underpaid to care much about anything. Staffers were quite different from teachers and various 'enforcers', most of whom had vehemently adhered to agendas, like the English department's Nazi tactics and iconic paranoia. Someone may think for themselves.

I completed 220 out of the 210 credits required to graduate HS, and then dropped out of senior year and took the GED. The GED people require you to pass the test, or they won't give you a diploma. Not so of high school, where just showing up counts, and there isn't even a test. I wanted a degree that mattered.

As a HS Freshman I also started hanging out at college, which is where I picked up most of the attitude evident today. I've been in college ever since, only skipping 1987.

There isn't much difference in college, we just get to play with more dangerous toys and talk about sex. Administration is typically blind stupid, over-paid degrees who couldn't cut it in the real world. They spend an entire year deciding what color the flowers should be.



Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-26 23:18 • by johnsmith (unregistered)
202858 in reply to 201847
"Panda"

Never heard that - good one. I'll start using it on this side of the pond.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:15 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202883 in reply to 201944
nobis:

Also "jeze just post teh codz here and stop everyone from asking for them to be emailed" mean quit preaching to the blog-o-tubes about how to act when a cop pulls you over.

Because well... If you read a post on thedailywtf.com about how to act when a cop pulls you over, and you change the way you act when a cop pulls you over. You are already are stupid and most likly need to be shot anyway to save the gene pool.


That's TRWTF, we're discussing about how to react on American police when they pull you over. Hell, I've never been to the US and I don't even consider going there ever in my life. The stories we hear about US cops are quite frightening compared to European cop stories. Here, we ususally are nice to the cops and they are nice (well, within the limits, coz they still isuue a ticket for you) with us.

So, if there are more cop stories from other parts of the world, I'd actually appreciate it quite a lot. US cops, go away. You are the new Nazis. I just remember the young black guy whos head was banged against the boardwalk by cops, just for fun.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:23 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202884 in reply to 201947
EvanED:
Erik:
The fact that we now blithely accept the fact that officers of the law will, in situations that totally fail to warrant it, train their weapons on people whom they have no serious reason to fear, should probably clue you into something.

Have you looked at death rates of cops? It's not one of the most dangerous jobs, but it is probably more risky than what 90% of what people do. And traffic stops, at least in the US, are one of the most dangerous activities they partake in.


Don't forget every dick can carry an arm in the US. And you (the Americans) just defended that "right". Now, even in states where it was not allowed to walk around with an armed gun, it is permitted. So, what do you want? In the UK, the bobbies don't wear guns, and they are not shot either. In Germany, they wear guns but they don't use them unless it's really going to be critical.
So, to me at least, it looks like this is due to a power-against-power situation. The more arms you have the more arms are pointed against you. Basta. Come down to a reasonable use of arms and your cops will not fear death every day they go on duty.

Quite simple, no?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:32 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202885 in reply to 201951
Dude:
EvanED:
Dude:
Atario:
Too bad you're not a cop. Because that kind of abuse of power would quickly get you locked up, and we'd all be rid of you.

WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO DECIDE WHAT AN ABUSE OF POWER IS AND ISN'T???

BTW, we'd rather be rid of you, IDIOT!

As someone who agrees with Atario, speak for yourself, not "us".


Why don't you just keep your mouth shut, too. I'll speak for whoever I want to!


Yuo definAtely are a hero...

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:32 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202886 in reply to 201951
Dude:
EvanED:
Dude:
Atario:
Too bad you're not a cop. Because that kind of abuse of power would quickly get you locked up, and we'd all be rid of you.

WHAT GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO DECIDE WHAT AN ABUSE OF POWER IS AND ISN'T???

BTW, we'd rather be rid of you, IDIOT!

As someone who agrees with Atario, speak for yourself, not "us".


Why don't you just keep your mouth shut, too. I'll speak for whoever I want to!


You definAtely are a hero...

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:34 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202887 in reply to 201953
Dude:
Sheila Joyce Gibbs:
I would like to submit my story, on the loss of my best-friend/husband.
It is approximately 3 pages long, so if you could advise if possible.
Many thanks.
Sheila
sjgibbs@shaw.ca
ph. no. 250-995-1643


Why? What does this have to do with anything?


Exactly, FACAAAAAAAAAADE!

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:38 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202889 in reply to 201964
Mr Coffee:
I have a rather large erection right now.


So, it's more than usual?

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 05:41 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202890 in reply to 201965
eric76:

For a time while I was in high school, we had one town cop who would stop us at night and we would get out with pistols and rifles in hand. We knew that if he stopped us, he was bored and wanted to go out to the city dump and shoot rats.


So what do you want. You shoot at them, they shoot at you. Pretty fair. A good way to get rid of all those immensly stupid Americans.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 06:18 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202895 in reply to 201986
Loki:
Sharper Observer:

You are both wrong.
The correct spelling is GREY.
GRAY is a common American misspelling, not English.


GRAY is the correct spelling, and deliveries are made by TRUCKS, and electricity is generated by ALTERNATORS or GENERATORS, and and a HOOD covers the engine compartment of a car, and the "Queen's English" is a dialect spoken only in West Hollywood, and you get a drink in a BAR, and we smoke cigarettes, we don't "suck fags" (again, with the exception of West Hollywood) - and we have bailed your ass out for the last time (see WWI and WWII), asshole...


Whoa, the American heroes. They arrived at the end of the war when everything was over. And now they behave like they fought the entire war. Fuck off, you just did the clean-up, not more.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 06:52 • by ClaudeSuck.de
202904 in reply to 202207
[quote user="Johnny Canuck"][quote user="NutherCanuck"][quote user="FredSaw"][quote user="Johnny Canuck"]As an honour roll student, I wound up writing one (mandatory) English final in my last year. A good friend of mine, who was not a good student, didn't get any recommends. He was the one who pointed out the unfairness inherent.[/quote]I fail to see inherent unfairness. At the beginning of the class, did you two stand the same chance of succeeding?[/quote]

Let me try to explain it as simply as I can. Let us suppose my friend and I are of equal ability in English. (The mandatory exam.) As the English final approaches, classes end as exams start. As I am a good student in math, science and so on, English is the only final I have to write. As he is not as good, he will be writing many exams.

I now have 2 weeks to devote to studying for the final English exam. However, my friend has to devote his study time to many different subjects. As a result, he has only two days to study for English.

Given that we were equal in English ability throughout the year (getting near identical marks on all assignments and papers) it should surprise no one that I ace the final exam, while he does not since he didn't have the same amount of time to prepare. And since the final exam is a majority of the mark, we now have vastly different English marks.

The unfairness is that when one looks at transcripts, one will assume I am far superior in English. While in reality, my English mark is actually due to the fact that I am superior in math & science and it's very likely my friend is at least my equal if not better.

That's why it's "unfair". [/quote]

TRWTF is that you're learning English.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-06-27 08:38 • by RF (unregistered)
Sigh. Misandric anti-aggression strikes again.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-07-08 08:31 • by SpamBot (unregistered)
204819 in reply to 201838
FredSaw:
webhamster:
At my high school you were able to skip a final if your grade was 70% or higher (at the teacher's discretion).
My college physics professor told the class that we would have five tests throughout the semester, including the final. He would discard the two with the lowest scores and average the other three, and that would be our semester grade. When I received my third 100 on the third test, I approached him after class and made sure I'd understood correctly, and told him I already had three A's.

"Well, you've got an A for the semester, then," he said, followed by, "I would hope you'd continue to attend the class..."

Fat chance.


mwahahahahaha!

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-09-09 20:35 • by loseurmarbles (unregistered)
The first part of this reminds me of an XKCD comic.



http://xkcd.com/327/

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-10-18 10:13 • by Drambuie (unregistered)
223523 in reply to 201774
sugarfree:
"She was bald ... with curly graying hair"

uh...what?



Perhaps the hair was on her chin? ;P

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-10-18 10:21 • by Drambuie (unregistered)
223524 in reply to 202287
donniel:
campkev:
Mel:
Not everyone reading or commenting here is in the US. Some people reading and commenting here are in a country where it's reasonable to assume that a cop won't shoot you. Hell, in New Zealand, cops (in general) don't even carry guns! In some countries, there's a thing called respect - which is more prevalent than gun-carrying. I'm glad I can choose to live in one of those countries.

If I'm stopped by police while I'm driving, I'll get out if I want to - or I might stay in the car (until asked to get out). I'm not in the US. My first thought isn't "He's going to shoot me if I do something wrong".


I'm in the U.S. and that's not my first thought either. Evidently some people have watched a few too many episodes of "The Shield"


I'm not from the US, but my first thought when somebody mentioned getting out of the car was "Don't, moron - you'll get shot!". I haven't watched 'The Shield', but I've watched a lot of 'World's Wildest Police Videos'.

Interesting and thought-provoking arguments from both sides of the debate.


Yes - there was that episode where police trapped a speeding car by stopping suddenly in front of it, then when the car tapped it while coming to a stop interpreted this as "deliberate ramming", opened fire into the car windscreen from all angles knowing full well there were passengers in the car, then stated afterwards that the driver had put his passengers "at risk" by forcing police to shoot at them.

Not quite as dumb as the cops who killed an innocent guy experiencing a seizure using a taser, though.

Re: The Exemption Pass

2008-10-20 03:38 • by ChameleonDave
Some people on here seem to want it both ways. I'm hearing assertions that bizarrely submissive behaviour in front of a cop is somehow his due, and also assertions that, despite any theoretical right to do as you wish, you ought to be submissive for practical reasons of survival.

Those aren't compatible. The first way of looking at it is simply false: I am not under arrest, so there is no legal obligation even to be civil, nor a moral one, if he is inconveniencing me unduly. His concerns for his safety are irrelevant, because he is obviously armed, whereas I am not armed (to my knowledge definitely, and to his knowledge probably). The risk to me is therefore greater. Should I therefore disarm him pre-emptively? No, that would be discourteous and inconveniencing for him.

The second way of looking at it ignores rights and wrongs, and considers that the cop is simply an existential threat to me, much as a bear would be, and that I therefore should stay in the car. The problem with that is that I would be fully justified in putting down either a wild bear or a rabid cop roaming the city. It would moreover be a public duty. If you dislike the consequences of people viewing police officers like that, then you should therefore refrain from arguing that they ought to be so viewed.

�ѳ����׵�֢״

2008-11-14 12:00 • by �ѳ����׵�֢״ (unregistered)
רҵ�ѳ����׵�֢״��Ϣ,�ѳ����׵�֢״��ҵ��˾��㼯���ڶ��ѳ����׵�֢״��ҵ����ȫ���������ѳ����׵�֢״������Ϣ�г�����̨�ѳ���������,�ѳ���������,����,������,�����ѳ���������,�й���̨,�����ѳ���������,�����������������ѳ����������ݸ˱�����,�ݸ˱���վ����,�ݸ˱�����׬Ǯ,�����ݸ˱ô���,�����ݸ˱ù���ϵͳ,�����ݸ˱ù����������Ӳ�ȼƱ���ý�忯������Ӳ�ȼ�����ȫ��ý���������Ӳ�ȼƹ�����Ϣ�ռ�����Ӳ�ȼƹ�˾�Ƽ����ۼ�Ŀ��۸������Ӳ�ȼ�.Э���������������˾������������޹�˾,��רҵ��������޹�˾,�������ҵ����ϵר�߹���������޹�˾�й��������Ը��ף����Ը���Ƶ��������ʡ�������Ը�����Ϣ��Ѷƽ̨����������ȫ���Ը������µ����Ը�����Ѷ�������Ը��׵�֢״���ű����������������Ը��׵�֢״������Ϣ�����ְ�˹���Ը���֢״,�������Ը���֢״,���Ը���֢״����,ƽ�����Ը���֢״,�������Ը���֢״,��Ц���Ը���֢״,�������Ը���֢״,

ONO SOKKI

2009-01-09 23:54 • by ONO SOKKI (unregistered)
���ھ���ONO SOKKI2007�ڶ���ɽ��ONO SOKKI���佱ʢ���֪ͨ ... �ӿ콨��ONO SOKKIǿ�� .... ʮһONO SOKKIάȨע�����ONO SOKKIͶ����Ҫע��ONO SOKKIʱЧ�й�ͨ��paper box machinery��,�ṩ��ס�����ι���paper box machinery���paper box machinery�Żݡ��������㡢paper box machinery��·�������Ρ������μǡ�����paper box machinery����Ϣ����pearl jewelry���Ϻ������������ݣ��ṩӢ�﷭�롣�������ҹ�˾������pearl jewelry���Ϻ�pearl jewelry�͹���pearl jewelry
planting equipment����,planting equipment����,��ҵ��ҳ,��Ƹ��ְ,planting equipment��̳,planting equipment��,planting equipment��˾
�й�pms��Ϊ����pms�����һƷ��,�й�pms���ǹ��������Ƶ�pms���Ʒpms����������ƽ̨��̨polyol,polyol,����,������,����polyol,�й���̨,����polyol,����������������polyol����poster printing�����ɸ���ʡposter printing������ĸ������poster printing�Ż���վ����������poster printing�������͸���poster printing��Ѷ������ϸ���ܸ������poster printing��Ϣ����Ҫ�ṩpower leveling��power levelingϵ�е�power leveling��Ʒ���ṩ�й���power leveling��power leveling�����Ϣ��ѯ�����߶���power leveling�ȷ���
« PrevPage 1 | Page 2 | Page 3 | Page 4 | Page 5 | Page 6Next »

Add Comment