Hard News: A Strange Surprise
131 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Someone could always OIA the comms planning and focus group results for the campaign..
-
oh so theres serious and then theres more seriously...most serious of all then lucy, you've just disarmed someone who by bumrushing you with scissors proves some sort of irrationality. what would you do next ?
and scotty, no ones talking bout beating a woman up, i'm talking about hypothetically restraining and calming down an irrational person irrespective of gender who just tried to stab you. what would you do...sing them a lullaby in the hope it would soothe their savage beast ?
in that scenario i suggest you get some help and dont worry bout me...
-
Only one 'person' introduced this into a discussion about the legal defense of provocation:
damn...so if my lady comes at me with a pair of scissors, i cant stab her 216 times and mutilate her corpse then claim provocation?
Hardly "restraining and calming" is it?
And if you don't see what a cock that type of talk makes you, then I pity your family. -
if you don't see what a cock that type of talk makes you, then I pity your family
oh no you didnt...
-
Truce - er or should I say theatre.
Time for beddy byes now.
-
The most charitable thing I can say about dubmuggas comment is that it was a joke in extremely poor taste, so poor it wasn't even clear if it was a joke. Without charity, it looks even worse, it looks like a nasty troll, directed mostly at the girls. Honeymoon was over long ago as far as I can see, so no reason to extend charity.
-
The most charitable thing I can say about dubmuggas comment is that it was a joke in extremely poor taste, so poor it wasn't even clear if it was a joke.
Eh, I'll grant that it was a poorly-worded joke. It's the continued defence that's trollish.
-
dubmuggas comment
I can't see a joke but don't think he is serious, perhaps more, pushing the boundaries (inviting reaction) of which he/she did throw in there somewhere. I think with such proud and pretty photos shown by this dubmeister, can't be serious about ill treatment of others. Let's face it, lots to be learnt on PAS,and many ways to learn. Shock and awe is one way, via certain music/ poetry. It's not textbook. As my man said, reading between the lines,"do the first line if you can't understand the book, do the other line...." :)
-
I enjoyed the NS discussion on Media 7 Russell, a good choice of guests. A nice tone of discussion, good questions and in the main well informed and thought provoking answers.
The only answer I felt unsatisfied with was Gary Gotlieb's response to your question
"In the age of the internet is name suppression even practical anymore?"
He answered
"Well yes it is and the Law Commison Report refers to the internet and has talked of increasing penalties."
Not having any knowledge of the report I'm still left wondering penalties for whom?
As Jock Anderson had just mentioned prior to your question;
"people who within minutes are widely known throughout the community"
Placing greater criminal liability on third parties such as yourself. Although I'm dubious as to how aggressively suppression breaches are prosecuted. Personally I've had that song "Rat Rat Rat on your neighbour" playing in my head all week, following Robyn's response to my alleged transgression;
I just reported a comment for naming a name, but it's gone now. Just as well.
While I don't dispute what I may have written may have been inconsiderate and shown poor judgement, I do have concerns about the mindsets the law generates. Especially in relation to
a) our civic responsibility to uphold the law of the land, and the relevance of those laws to the greater good
b) our natural curiosity and expectations of being able to exercise freedom of speech, and general transparency about our humanity.
I enjoyed watching that, it was also nice to see Wammo again after all these years.
-
LeeP,
The LTSA might have changed the ad on their website overnight. I thought I saw the driver hit one of the checkpoint road cones.
-
"Bill, strange things are afoot at the Circle K."
-
Why don't they reinforce this point with a protective sleeve, or something?
That is fairly easy for an electrician to fix. This reply is hella late but hey...
also my dad left his Bose noise cancelling headphones on a tree (he was using them for chain sawing. He then left the country (he called me from the airport claiming I had stolen said headphones....) then there was a serious storm. Then a couple of weeks passed. Then I went to dads house to welcome him home and noticed his headphones attached to a branch of tree.
They still worked fine and didn't even look in any way damaged.
-
By 'not getting the benefit of the defence', I would guess you mean his lawyer was unable to run that as a defence stategy at the trial.
Oh, wait....
Weatherston's lawyer did as she was instructed as any agent should. The defence, if I recall correctly, failed.
-
If we are still posting links, here is the new promo for the NZ book council:
-
Only one 'person' introduced this into a discussion about the legal defense of provocation:
damn...so if my lady comes at me with a pair of scissors, i cant stab her 216 times and mutilate her corpse then claim provocation?
Hardly "restraining and calming" is it?
And if you don't see what a cock that type of talk makes you, then I pity your family.Much as I told myself I wouldn't get sucked into this particular sub-debate, I can't help but point out that your out-of-context quote tends to misrepresent the OP somewhat.
- Seems to me the original comment was intended to highlight the absurdity of Weatherston's argument that his actions were somehow justified because he was provoked and/or defending himself, not indicate something the OP personally thinks is reasonable.
I'm not offering any opinion on whether the whole OP was well-advised or not of course.
-
- Seems to me the original comment was intended to highlight the absurdity of Weatherston's argument that his actions were somehow justified because he was provoked and/or defending himself, not indicate something the OP personally thinks is reasonable.
Yes and threw in The joker, from "Batman, The Dark Knight" in his comments also highlighting absurdity?
-
Yes and threw in The joker, from "Batman,
Ok mixed 2 threads again. Sorry It should have been on the March for Democracy but then this comment probably doesn't work but there is a trend in the Dubmugga approach but so what..
Here is that comment anyhow. -
There's some talk here of "disarming" or "knocking some sense into" a person who is trying to stab you with a pair of scissors. That's not a good idea.
Assertive retreats are where it's at. First, you need to leave, and you need to be as assertive about it as you possibly can. Don't ask, don't bargain, don't chat, just leave. Use your loud voice as you go.
Do not grab at the weapon, or the person with the weapon. Do not approach the person with a weapon, other than to get past should they corner you.
Should you be restrained, you'll find the application of extreme violence should aid in your attempts to leave. Driving your fingers deep into their eye sockets, or biting a piece off their face or hand, that sort of thing.If you should be stabbed at despite your best attempts to get away, catch the weapon in (stabbed through) the palm of your hand, as it's an easy enough trick, and much safer than being stabbed anywhere else. Then get back to that leaving thing.
Second, contact the police, or any one of the thousands of random people nearby who might respond more quickly. Getting together with folk who are not looking likely to stab you is to be considered a high priority. -
Regarding poor jokes and whether or not it's trollish, being an Earnest Feminist, I could have done without the remark that it's never ok to beat up on a woman. Because us ladeez need *cough*patronising*cough* protecting?
Look, it's not ok for anyone to beat up on anyone else. In our culture(s), it's just more endemic for men to be doing the beatings (quite a bit on each other as well - fisticuffs at the pub and on the footy field seems to be just dandy).
I will say, regarding dubmugga's comments, having been in situations where one person has tried to slap some sense into someone else, it doesn't work. It escalates things. (And yes, I've been on both sides of that one; learned better now.) If someone starts brandishing a weapon at you (in the usual context of a DV incident), leave and call the cops. Simple.
Getting back to somewhat the original point, my issue with drug-testing, which should be about ascertaining whether someone is fit to drive or perform their work, is that it is purely to prove you've imbibed naughty substances and you should therefore be locked up. It's a condition of my employment that I can be drug-tested if I seem impaired, or potentially at any time when visiting certain facilities. If I have a positive test (no matter if it's the residue of a joint 4 weeks ago), I'm likely to lose my employment. You know, because Drugs Are Illegal and potentially impairing. However, if you get done for drunk-driving, unless you hold a passenger licence and that's your job, it's unlikely that you'll lose your employment. But you've still broken the law by getting behind that wheel.
Maybe if the powers-that-be actually came up with some figures for drug impairment, developed tests that could define if someone were likely to be impaired, and legislated on that basis, I'd feel a little less cynical about EVUL DRUGS BOOGA BOOGA, but as it is, I think it's a load of bullshit.
Sure, I know plenty of idiots who drove while drug-impaired and should have had the book thrown at them. I also agree that there needs to be a look at the culture of drug-driving being somehow more acceptable than drunk-driving (because it seems to me that it is, but I also think that's partly a function of there being no defined "safe" limits). But I also believe that the vast majority of the dangerously-impaired people behind the wheel have consumed that perfectly legal drug. And having a philosophy of saying "we don't know how much of X is dangerous, but we'll nab you anyway" doesn't really confer much confidence that it's about public safety rather than being Seen to Be Doing Things.
-
doesn't really confer much confidence that it's about public safety rather than being Seen to Be Doing Things.
I've always felt pretty safe being driven by someone who has only imbibed THC than those either sleep deprived or drunk.
Hard to feel much danger when you're going km/h in a 40 zone. They're paranoid.
-
that should read "10km/h in a 40 zone".
Seems the powers that be are mixing their demographics.
Currently late night road traffic is probably either boyracers, stoners or workers. Forcing the stoners to stay home and microwave, the boy racers will simply gain more late night road space, leaving the roads less safe for the workers"
-
Ive tried "the slap' as a shock tactic and it worked fine.
but that was after a car crash where my mate was frozen solid and white as ash, hands grasping the dash and refusing to acknowledge us or our request to exit the vehicle...
...so i slapped him real hard across the face and he snapped out of it but was still a bit dazed
-
Yep. Chop it off, get a new jack from Dick Smith for ... $5.95?, solder it on (make sure you get your left / right correct.)
If that sounds like more trouble than it's worth, any repair place will be able to do that for peanuts. [quote]
Ehmm what repair place will do it for "peanuts"?
Standard minimum charge is often as high as $70. -
I've always felt pretty safe being driven by someone who has only imbibed THC than those either sleep deprived or drunk.
I really share this opinion.
The problem with THC is that it is hard to tell which dose actually makes it insecure to drive. So I think it is just safer to keep stoners out of the traffic. Their reaction time is simply slowed down, which makes it dangerous to drive under those circumstances.
-
i have a comedown time of an hour and a half, during which i try to do nothing especially drive, after a good toke, unless i'm long hauling it and need to refocus/stay awake in which case i pull over, pack a sly cone then hit the road again:)
Post your response…
This topic is closed.