News Stories

[ganbaru]

Originally Posted by Merilyn Mensola

I see this news in the TG today..

Man...sad...is really sad...people like this...should not exist in the world

They do exist and they don't pop out from the void, they are ''made''. It's a thing than should even more be addressed than how they get the way to do what they do.

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Edit: Gilbert mass killing: Border militia leader identified as shooter
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...tims-abrk.html

Wait a second.
This guy Ready was a Neo-Nazis who had a Latina girlfriend???

I smell bullshit.

And for the record, all males between the ages of 18 and 45 are members of the US militia according to Title 10 Section 311 of the US Code.
Theodoore Roosevelt made it that way with the "Dick Act" of 1903 in order to bolster civilian training in the use of military arms, so the media and police need to knock off the hyperbolic "Ooh, he/she/it was a member of a militia!"
It is the right of the Federal government to have at its disposal every able-bodied male, armed with military weaponry provided by themselves, to meet the requirements of Article 1, section 8 of the Federal Constitution.

Then the article goes on to say Ready was a former US Marine who headed the US Border Guard, a militia-style group.
Well, which is it?
Is it an actual militia-group or is it a Border Defense group like Ranch Rescue or one of these other community organizations in the border states.

The propaganda of the Yahoo/AP article is worse, it has to add "assault rifles, and gas-masks, and fatigues.
Yet the article you cited said the police only found two handguns and a shotgun.

Somebody's lying.

Clearly this ex-Marine had a domestic dispute with his girlfriend and this other guy and lost control.
His life outside of that is really moot to the fact that he murdered his girlfriend, her kids, and this other person.
The US Marine Corps teaches soldiers "the will to kill" and sometimes that training has a serious side-effect.
Charles Whitman being a classic case of that serious side-effect of such training.

So ganbaru, you are correct in my opinion, these people are not born, they are made and sometimes by the US government with unintended consequences.

[ganbaru]

Sometime by the U.S. gouvernment, sometime it's more of a family issue other time it'S some kind of ''cult of the gun''.

[GundamFan0083]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

Sometime by the U.S. gouvernment, sometime it's more of a family issue other time it'S some kind of ''cult of the gun''.

There is no more a "cult of the gun" then there is a "cult of violence" from video games/movies/anime.

It's like these people who say that gay people shouldn't adopt children because it will make the children homosexual.

Or the thing with the Rick Ross types who said that D&D made kids into Satanists or made them run off and commit suicide.
Some even said it "hypnotizes children" into becoming occultists.

Or that pornography causes rape.

It's all a steaming pile of bullshit that stems from a desire to not hold people, and only people, responsible for their own actions.

Ready chose to kill his girlfriend, her children, and the other man.
No one, no cult of the gun, no violent vidoe game, no "devil music," no RPG, no porno, nothing intangible was the cause that made him do it.
READY, and ONLY Ready was the cause of this tragedy.

[Merilyn Mensola]

Originally Posted by ganbaru

They do exist and they don't pop out from the void, they are ''made''. It's a thing than should even more be addressed than how they get the way to do what they do.

Yeah..i agree with you...however...doesn't change the fact..that people doing something like this,should not exist in the world.

[GundamFan0083]

House GOP to distribute draft contempt citation against Eric Holder over "gunwalking"


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...ing/?tag=stack

Occupy's image blown to smithereens: Kevin O'Brien


http://www.cleveland.com/obrien/inde...o_smither.html

[Hiroi Sekai]

Originally Posted by Paranoid Android

Exactly, this is unfortunate but the cab driver is the one with the heavier charges here. His actions displayed thought and intention. It was not uncontrolled panic. Of course if he gets a lawyer, they'll be defending that he was in panic. It's a necessary attempt that will most likely fail and give him the charge for attempted manslaughter.

What is really gonna be sad is he may lose his job. I hope his agency has more common sense than the law enforcement. =/

Off topic but in Canada, a lot of people intentionally back up their car in the middle of traffic, and sue the person behind them for rear end. Because rear end is 100% the driver behind's fault. Even if the person in front backs out at incredible speeds on a highway. The road laws are so retarded sometimes.

Other being the hitting pedestrian or cyclist is always the driver's fault.

Tell me about it, I was born in Ontario and grew up there...terrible, terrible driving situations (no offense). Hell, British Columbia ain't much better as people have almost hit my car several times by not looking first. If they're that reckless in general, I could see pedestrians being at risk as well. In fact, I've seen several hit and runs around here in the recent years for sure, where the drivers were deemed to be at fault.

Speaking of accident scams, once one gets rear ended they also complain about neck strain and trauma, as that's a department one can sue for a lot of money in and is near impossible to prove. Don't get any ideas, though!

[Paranoid Android]

Did you see the case where the accident scammer lost the law suit and got counter-suit for fraud and was charged? The rear-ender had a camera built into his car o_O and it was caught on tape the guy was backing up in the middle of the highway. We need more of that!

[Haak]

Bin Laden documents released:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17941778

But Bin Laden warned them not to bother targeting Vice-President Joe Biden because "Biden is totally unprepared for that post [of president], which will lead the US into a crisis."

Lol, I can imagine Biden's comical indignation.
"I know he's a mass murdering terrorist...but that was just uncalled for..."

I bet Obama makes a few wise cracks about it every now and then as well.

[GDB]

Originally Posted by GundamFan0083

Occupy's image blown to smithereens: Kevin O'Brien


http://www.cleveland.com/obrien/inde...o_smither.html

And, of course, the Occupiers' No. 1 concern: people who live more responsibly and thus have more money than they do.

Well, I can tell what side of the fence this idiot writer leans on. How does this situation destroy the Occupy movement at all? If this is all it took, then couldn't someone do the same thing and say they're Tea Party, or GOP, and "blow it to smitherines" too?

The Occupy people say the existing social, political and economic order is unjust. They want to blow it up, if you will, and to replace it with . . . well, they'll cross that bridge when they come to it, assuming they haven't blown it up.

The Tea Party people know exactly what they want: a country that operates according to its Constitution. We haven't been there in a long time, but going back will be worth the trip.

Yeah, this guy's definitely a biased fool.

[Paranoid Android]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17914503

Originally Posted by BBC

Toronto Mayor Rob Ford cruised to victory a year-and-a-half ago pledging to end what he dubbed "the war on the car." He argued that bike lanes were taking away space for automobiles.

"And what I compare bike lanes to is swimming with the sharks. Sooner or later you're going to get bitten," said Ford speaking in 2010 as a member of the city council.

Now he is in power and Toronto hasn't just stopped putting in bike lanes; it has started removing some of them.

This really gets me angry. The city's going backwards because of him.

1. Toronto's the most congested, dense and populated city in Canada, one of the largest in North America (5,000,000+)
2. It's illegal for a cyclist in Toronto to bike on a pedestrian sidewalk.
3. There's no requirement of any sort that restricts who can be cycling on the road.
4. There's no place for a bicycle on most roads and cars often drive by cyclists at high speeds on the same lane.

And his argument to removing the few cycling lanes that do exist is that they're a waste of space? And he rejects all contact with the media.

There's almost no one on his side on this. Cyclists's opinions are obvious, our lives are in danger without specified cycling lanes. But even cars owners wouldn't be on this side. Because of the lack of development for cycling and regulations, cyclists end up being stupid lawless jay-walker (er.. jay-cyclists) that are all over the place obstructing traffic. Almost every driver I know hates that cyclists are all over the place without proper traffic signals and block up their lanes.

Just imagine if pedestrian sidewalks no longer exist and anyone that wants to walk must walk on the road.

[Dhomochevsky]

The way it's done here:
- A cycling lane on the road is usually made by banning parking on the roadsides. The space that was parking space before, is now cycling space.
- If there is no such space on the road, but there is a sidewalk, half the sidewalk and give one half to cyclists and one half to pedestrians.
- Only in cases where that is not possible either, a cycling lane is built into the actual driving lane. But for those, you are allowed to ignore them in a car, if there is no bike around. Not such a nice place to be with a bike.

Still not as bycicle friendly as the netherlands, but it works.

[Paranoid Android]

Pedestrians will literally jump in front of you and shout at you telling you to get off the sidewalk if you do that in downtown Toronto. Like road laws, if a pedestrian gets hit by a cyclist, cyclist is going to be in a world of hurt. And don't forget most cyclists don't have cycling insurance. (I am insured by my cycling club)

You could call those people assholes for jumping in front of bikes for some law suit money, but this wouldn't happen if the law actually protected cyclists after forcing them to go on the roads. Unlike a bike vs person collision, a car vs bike collision is usually guaranteed death.

[Dhomochevsky]

Well, it's not 'the sidewalk' anymore, if half of it was given to cyclists.
That usually means signs, which tell you what side of the sidewalks belongs to whom (Germans love signs, they are everywhere!), a line painted down the middle which you better not cross and sometimes the whole thing is color coded, painting the cyclist's side red or blue and the other side... gray.

[Ithekro]

The problem we have with cyclists in California is not that they don't have rights to the road, is that they don't follow the rules. Or they think they can realistically challenge the thousand pound or more car in the middle lane of the main roads. I see plently of cyclists that do not obey the traffic laws at all., such as not stopping at stop signs. Or follow the laws in what I consider a dangerous way. I've seem people in the left lane (the one nearest to oncoming traffic) at a stop light use it like a normal car....save that there is no way he can accelerate to stay up with traffic from that point and is (I think) endangering others as well as himself.

[Endless Soul]

I don't even think there is such a thing as cycling insurance here in So Cal. Bike riding on the sidewalks is frowned upon, but rarely enforced. Same thing with bike helmets. The law says that riders 18 years old and under have to have helmets, but I see kids all the time riding without one.

My route to work has a bike lane for about &5% of the way. The rest of the time I'm riding in the gutter. Fortunately the street is wide enough that there's some room between the curb and the cars zooming by. I'd really like to use the bike trail, but it's too far to the north.

Had a pretty close call the other day when some guy in a Mercedes decided he didn't want to wait for me to pass and made his oncoming left turn in front of me. Missed me by a couple feet.

Endless "Cyclist" Soul

[Dhomochevsky]

I guess reckless driving is a standard for cyclists everywhere.
I tend to bent the rules if I'm on bike too.
I don't straight out run through red lights, but I do things like skip over to the other sidewalk 20m ahead of the red light, then go around it.
Or if I reach a red light and I want to go left, I hop on the sidewalk to the right, use the pedestrians' green light to cross over, then enter the lane I want to and move on.

But in general I try to stay away from cars and any streets that have more than 50km/h. That's just suicide.

Cyclists do have the same rights as cars (except for the Autobahn), but it's just not a good idea to force them.

[Endless Soul]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

The problem we have with cyclists in California is not that they don't have rights to the road, is that they don't follow the rules. Or they think they can realistically challenge the thousand pound or more car in the middle lane of the main roads. I see plently of cyclists that do not obey the traffic laws at all., such as not stopping at stop signs. Or follow the laws in what I consider a dangerous way. I've seem people in the left lane (the one nearest to oncoming traffic) at a stop light use it like a normal car....save that there is no way he can accelerate to stay up with traffic from that point and is (I think) endangering others as well as himself.

Yep, I see this all the time too. Red lights and stop signs mean nothing to a lot of cyclists, and that makes the rest of us look bad.

Endless "Too lazy to think of a nickname right now" Soul

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Endless Soul

Yep, I see this all the time too. Red lights and stop signs mean nothing to a lot of cyclists, and that makes the rest of us look bad.

Endless "Too lazy to think of a nickname right now" Soul

San Francisco District Attorney George Gascón is preparing to file felony vehicular manslaughter charges against Chris Bucchere, the bicyclist who fatally struck a 71-year-old pedestrian in the Castro district last month.

The felony charge - which could result in a 16-month sentence for Bucchere if he is convicted - is a sharp contrast to the misdemeanor count prosecutors filed in a case last year in which a bicyclist struck and killed a woman along the Embarcadero.

The difference this time is prosecutors' conclusion that Bucchere, 35, was grossly negligent in his riding before he ran into Sutchi Hui in a crosswalk at Market and Castro streets March 29.

"I think the evidence is very strong," said one source inside the D.A.'s office, who asked not to be named while the charges are still pending.
The problem wasn't that Bucchere ran a red light - prosecutors think the light was yellow when he rode into the intersection heading south.

But before that, a motorist reported seeing Bucchere fly through several red lights and stop signs along Divisadero Street leading up to the intersection, said police Capt. Denis O'Leary, head of the hit-and-run detail that investigated the collision.

Also, a tracker on Bucchere's bike allegedly showed he was riding faster than 35 mph in a 25-mph zone.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MNDS1O8C59.DTL

speed kills, car or bike.

[Paranoid Android]

Yes, most cyclists are idiots, because there are no qualifications or regulations to control it. I don't know any place in the world that requires a cycling license earned through a cycling exam. Then they shouldn't be allowed on the road. But here, you can't be on the sidewalk. One time I cheated and was crossing the street on the pedestrian's striped area and was pulled over by the police and he charged me $110. Luckily I got away with not paying because I pleaded not guilty and he didn't show up to court.

What's sad is my road to work is 90% cycling lanes and park trails. I was pulled over and charged at that 10%. It was a 12 lane x 8 lane massive intersection.

The manner in which i was caught was rather funny. I had my earphones plugged in, holding a bottle of pepsi in one hand and the other hand off the handle. I pretty much realized I was screwed once I heard the siren.