Political rants

We have the Ohio grass-man up here. See, there's another parallel between us and Florida. And that's just what the lumber companies want you to think, Laaaaaambiiiiiii! You ever think of that? BOOM! I win! *Hoists a flag preemptively and puts wax in his ears* No really, I'm agnostic on the subject until I see one for myself. Got four friends who claim to have seen him, and three of them are that second type of witness. One of which is in the same supernatural shit I'm into, and knows a thing or two about identifying the placebo effect. For whatever that's worth. Gotta remember that deciduous forests are generally very bad for leaving fossils and stuff like that.

@chocopyro life is so boring and manotinous, so routine, i wish stuff like that was real. black eyed children, ghosts, windigo, faeries, bigfeet. just to spice things up, ya know? i should get a book on the different big feet across the regions. whats best about the bigfoot is the scientific connection to him being the missing link. crossing mythos and science is really fun when i go back to Florida ill scope out the skunk ape for ya, see if i can find any evidence to reignite that magic

There's something called anomalistics. Its applying the scientific principle to things that have strange correlations and stuff. Never putting a period at the end, only taking a look at something like "Well that's strange, why do so many fairy sightings involve them trying to give people wheat and whine?" or "Why is the smell of sulphur so commonly reported in demonic and angelic encounters?" That's ultimately the type of approach I recommend viewing paranormal and supernatural stuff through. It's more healthy to entertain the possibility of something without completely bending knee and submitting to the idea. That being said... Fairies and ghosts are real. I'm not afraid to assert that.

@momoichi Pepper spray is generally considered a viable solution for non-lethal force. I believe the potential benefits outweigh the cost in that case, as there are far fewer lethal risks in it's use, and it is almost always effective against the target. While it does carry the potential to be ineffective on some targets, it at the least would not trigger the authorization of lethal force if stolen and used on the officer. It maintains consistency as a non-lethal tool, opposed to tasers which are "less lethal" in the hands of an officer, but practically "lethal" in the hands of a suspect. While the wind can redirect the spray, there also exists the alternative of "pepper balls" to help mitigate this. Really, I don't think there needs to be an alternative to fill the niche of the taser. It is not even considered an essential tool for a police or security officer's arsenal, as it is merely optional for officers to wield if they are willing to go through taser training (in which they are tasered). It would be better to just get rid of it altogether for everyone's sake. ㄟ( ▔, ▔ )ㄏ Rubber bullets, flash balls, and those massive steel ball projectiles the Ferguson police attempted to introduce would probably fall more on the lethal side of the tool kit. They are considered "less lethal", instead of "non-lethal". While less lethal at a distance, most police officers will be in close proximity to potential suspects, which would increase the lethality of these projectiles. If an officer must use force that falls on the lethal side, it is only detrimental to use weapons that are simply "less lethal" over lethal force. Really, the only other alternative I can think of on the top of my head would perhaps be a net gun to entangle a suspect, but this only has potential use outdoors. (☞ﾟヮﾟ)☞ I think a contributing factor in the escalation of force within the police is due to a reduction of fitness standards over the years. This would make an officer easier to overpower, thus making them more reliant on escalating the use of force. Additionally, the militarization of police culture also probably contributes to increased escalation. Rather than seeing themselves as "peace keepers", police officers like to imagine themselves as "warriors". The sort of "cringe" you might recall seeing with the use of "punisher skull" and "spartan" imagery among the police. The police began to see themselves as an entity separated from the civilian population; this can encourage greater distrust of the regular citizenry. Another thing that contributes this alienation from the populace could be the practice of assigning beat officers to patrol communities they are not part of. A combination of reduced fitness, militarization, and alienation from the communities they patrol might be contributing factors to the escalation of force by officers. Of course it may be disappointing to you, but I have no sources to give you except the culmination of my experiences, past reading, and observations. Really, I'm just "shooting the shit", and throwing ideas out for others to think about. o7

There are two sides to every story https://youtu.be/B4j25C96Pfo https://youtu.be/q4NxLWmmsqs

@mountain_tiger Yeah, I largely agree here. Have you ever checked out 5th column? He actually talks a lot about police training and militarization/warrior culture, and criticisms of it. A lot of the data he shares is very eye opening. XD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmjB7TUroyE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB3HUXdmid4

@chocopyro give me a moment to watch this video and catch up to whats going on. Depending on content im gonna make a statment about police and military.

@hell_hound7 You have a right to. I have plenty of friends in both, and I respect them a hell of a lot more than it sounds like on the surface.

@chocopyro a couple kinutes into the video alot of what he is saying makes sense. I took a class for rules of engagement its required before you deploy on weapon safety for all military in my branch regardless if you will be using a weapon or not. That time distance and safety thing is sorta similar. Where as if a dude has a weapon even if it can be used to kill he needs to present intent. He cannot simply have a weapon and you fire away because you will be held accountable for every bullet thay leaves that rifle. So you defend yourself but only if you DEFEND yourself. Having the means to harm does not equal intent. But imma get into the meat and potatoes of these 2 vids. Because my stance is more leaning toward military styled rules of engagement for law enforcement.

Well, if our cops were half as well trained as the military, I certainly would be a lot less nervous about the equipment they've been getting fitted with. Hell, they need more training in deescalation than they get too, but that's just my 10 cents. Looking forward to hearing your take.