🔥 Popular | Latest

Being Alone, Batman, and Books: LIBRARIAN HUMOR ISEE WHAT YOU DID THERE 0 dracophile: randomthingieshere: pheenixwright: invenblocker: pheenixwright: invenblocker: pheenixwright: invenblocker: forthefuns: follow forthefuns for more funny stuff Your honor! Please direct your attention towards the manga.As you can see there are small pieces of paper sticking out of every volume.But no such paper is sticking out of the Batman comic.The reason? The Batman book doesn’t belong to the library. The photographer put it there to take a picture. Once again making hasty assumptions, Wright?First of all, I’d like to direct the court’s attention to this particular spot, in the top right-hand corner.Notice how the words are blocking the top of the Batman book.With this in mind, how can you claim that there is “no such paper sticking out of the Batman comic”?! Say whaaaat?Well uhmLook at the size of the paper pieces, they’re all sticking pretty far out.If there was paper in the batman comic, it would be big enough to stick up over the text.And while gravity does exist, it probably won’t make the paper do a 90 degree turn and just lean horisontally left at the middle.Still grasping for straws, Wright?Hypothetically, if there were a paper there, this picture would not be able to prove its presence. I’ve taken the liberty of drawing a diagram to illustrate my point. We are faced with three possibilities. It is possible that (1) the paper was simply tucked in deeper than the others.Paper is a soft material, Wright. It’s not unreasonable for it to do a (2) 90 degree turn. Or perhaps, (3) a paper does not exist there at all. Either way, you cannot prove your client innocent without sufficient evidence.   Which, of course, is impossible thanks to the obtrusive words. I’m sorry Edgeworth.I concede that I can’t disprove theory 1But the image you submited for theory 2 is contradictory.Look at the tilt of the other papers. They clearly prove how much the paper would tilt.And theory 3 is my point! Why would the library’s book not have this piece of paper when the other library books do?While you still have thory 1, there is another contradiction.The books are not in alphabetical order, this proves that the batman comic was placed there specifically for the picture! Ack.(Perhaps I should’ve left the artistry to the forensic artist…)Now hold it right there! It doesn’t matter which direction the paper is going because it’s impossible to prove it even exists!Those theories are all the same! We do not have enough information to prove them. There could be an infinite amount of papers in there for all we know. I simply presented them only so that the court could better understand your baseless conjecture!… I suppose the order of the books do seem out of the ordinary. However, therein lies not just one possibility. Clearly, those are Japanese graphic novels, also known as “manga”. And the Batman comic book is a graphic novel, too, no?Seeing as it currently has only graphic novels in the shelf, it is possible that any other novels have simply not yet been restocked. Asserting whether or not this effect was deliberate is useless– there is no way of knowing if the photographer and the captioner are the same person, let alone their involvement in this picture.Face it Wright, you can’t prove any of these groundless accusations! Did everyone just ignore the library sticker?

dracophile: randomthingieshere: pheenixwright: invenblocker: pheenixwright: invenblocker: pheenixwright: invenblocker: forthefuns: ...

Save
Anaconda, Crime, and Fail: 7 Ways Police Will Break the Law, Threaten, or Lie to You to Get What they Want Cops routinely break the law. Here's how. By Larken Rose / The Free Thought ProjectOctober 19, 2015 libertarirynn: gvldngrl: wolfoverdose: rikodeine: seemeflow: Because of the Fifth Amendment, no one in the U.S. may legally be forced to testify against himself, and because of the Fourth Amendment, no one’s records or belongings may legally be searched or seized without just cause. However, American police are trained to use methods of deception, intimidation and manipulation to circumvent these restrictions. In other words, cops routinely break the law—in letter and in spirit—in the name of enforcing the law. Several examples of this are widely known, if not widely understood. 1) “Do you know why I stopped you?”Cops ask this, not because they want to have a friendly chat, but because they want you to incriminate yourself. They are hoping you will “voluntarily” confess to having broken the law, whether it was something they had already noticed or not. You may think you are apologizing, or explaining, or even making excuses, but from the cop’s perspective, you are confessing. He is not there to serve you; he is there fishing for an excuse to fine or arrest you. In asking you the familiar question, he is essentially asking you what crime you just committed. And he will do this without giving you any “Miranda” warning, in an effort to trick you into testifying against yourself. 2) “Do you have something to hide?”Police often talk as if you need a good reason for not answering whatever questions they ask, or for not consenting to a warrantless search of your person, your car, or even your home. The ridiculous implication is that if you haven’t committed a crime, you should be happy to be subjected to random interrogations and searches. This turns the concept of due process on its head, as the cop tries to put the burden on you to prove your innocence, while implying that your failure to “cooperate” with random harassment must be evidence of guilt. 3) “Cooperating will make things easier on you.”The logical converse of this statement implies that refusing to answer questions and refusing to consent to a search will make things more difficult for you. In other words, you will be punished if you exercise your rights. Of course, if they coerce you into giving them a reason to fine or arrest you, they will claim that you “voluntarily” answered questions and “consented” to a search, and will pretend there was no veiled threat of what they might do to you if you did not willingly “cooperate.”(Such tactics are also used by prosecutors and judges via the procedure of “plea-bargaining,” whereby someone accused of a crime is essentially told that if he confesses guilt—thus relieving the government of having to present evidence or prove anything—then his suffering will be reduced. In fact, “plea bargaining” is illegal in many countries precisely because it basically constitutes coerced confessions.) 4) “We’ll just get a warrant.”Cops may try to persuade you to “consent” to a search by claiming that they could easily just go get a warrant if you don’t consent. This is just another ploy to intimidate people into surrendering their rights, with the implication again being that whoever inconveniences the police by requiring them to go through the process of getting a warrant will receive worse treatment than one who “cooperates.” But by definition, one who is threatened or intimidated into “consenting” has not truly consented to anything. 5.) We have someone who will testify against youPolice “informants” are often individuals whose own legal troubles have put them in a position where they can be used by the police to circumvent and undermine the constitutional rights of others. For example, once the police have something to hold over one individual, they can then bully that individual into giving false, anonymous testimony which can be used to obtain search warrants to use against others. Even if the informant gets caught lying, the police can say they didn’t know, making this tactic cowardly and illegal, but also very effective at getting around constitutional restrictions. 6) “We can hold you for 72 hours without charging you.”Based only on claimed suspicion, even without enough evidence or other probable cause to charge you with a crime, the police can kidnap you—or threaten to kidnap you—and use that to persuade you to confess to some relatively minor offense. Using this tactic, which borders on being torture, police can obtain confessions they know to be false, from people whose only concern, then and there, is to be released. 7) “I’m going to search you for my own safety.”Using so-called “Terry frisks” (named after the Supreme Court case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1), police can carry out certain limited searches, without any warrant or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, under the guise of checking for weapons. By simply asserting that someone might have a weapon, police can disregard and circumvent the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches. U.S. courts have gone back and forth in deciding how often, and in what circumstances, tactics like those mentioned above are acceptable. And of course, police continually go far beyond anything the courts have declared to be “legal” anyway. But aside from nitpicking legal technicalities, both coerced confessions and unreasonable searches are still unconstitutional, and therefore “illegal,” regardless of the rationale or excuses used to try to justify them. Yet, all too often, cops show that to them, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments—and any other restrictions on their power—are simply technical inconveniences for them to try to get around. In other words, they will break the law whenever they can get away with it if it serves their own agenda and power, and they will ironically insist that they need to do that in order to catch “law-breakers” (the kind who don’t wear badges). Of course, if the above tactics fail, police can simply bully people into confessing—falsely or truthfully—and/or carry out unconstitutional searches, knowing that the likelihood of cops having to face any punishment for doing so is extremely low. Usually all that happens, even when a search was unquestionably and obviously illegal, or when a confession was clearly coerced, is that any evidence obtained from the illegal search or forced confession is excluded from being allowed at trial. Of course, if there is no trial—either because the person plea-bargains or because there was no evidence and no crime—the “exclusionary rule” creates no deterrent at all. The police can, and do, routinely break the law and violate individual rights, knowing that there will be no adverse repercussions for them having done so. Likewise, the police can lie under oath, plant evidence, falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” or “assaulting an officer,” and commit other blatantly illegal acts, knowing full well that their fellow gang members—officers, prosecutors and judges—will almost never hold them accountable for their crimes. Even much of the general public still presumes innocence when it comes to cops accused of wrong-doing, while presuming guilt when the cops accuse someone else of wrong-doing. But this is gradually changing, as the amount of video evidence showing the true nature of the “Street Gang in Blue” becomes too much even for many police-apologists to ignore. http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/7-ways-police-will-break-law-threaten-or-lie-you-get-what-they-want One of the biggest realizations with dealing with cops for me was the fact that they CAN lie, they are 100% legally entitled to lie, and they WILL whether you’re a victim of crime, accused of committing a crime or anything else Everyone needs to reblog this, it could save a life. Important Seriously if you ever find yourself in custody don’t say shit until you’ve got some counsel with you. No cop is your friend in that situation.
Save
Be Like, Club, and Fake: a tale of trees and espionage okay story time: my professor (lovely man, married to our TA, 52", about as So studies trees. it was about three hours into our social sciences course, last lecture before exams, everyone was frazzled and exhausted, so he told us about his most exciting/in-depth research to date to cheer us up. (the few of us who actually showed up were like ok sir im sure its fascinating but in our minds we were totally like its trees what. is. exciting. about trees. You might be wondering the same thing-the acorns? the leaves? the roots? BUT NO. IMMA FUCKIN TELL YA.) ANYWAY we settle in, he had a few pictures loaded up from his field work (we were chuckling at this point.... 'hehehe field work' i giggled to my frend. its trees.) and began to tell his tale. it's long, imma warn you, but.... god. just read it theres an species of tree called the cucumber tree(Magnolia in our region there's only-280 that are registered by the government, yadda yadda yadda, my prof thought that was tragic (i know) but also strange, because when he was writing his thesis about local trees years ago, he kept coming across cucumber trees in really random places. we're talking like etc. IMPOSSIBLE because, according to tree very strictly protected by the govenment, and thus super legai to possess, transport, collect, buy or sell any part of a living or dead member of a listed species if it originates from sources. essentially, the govt takes control over g the trees and anyone who independently raises them is breaking the law (i kno) so he'd ask people "do you have a permit for these trees?" and they were like "uh no, it's just a tree someone sold me,i think it looks nice, are you gonna arrest me?" so he'd be like nah nah nah just tell me who sold it to you" eventually, months/years later, someone did, and turns out it was like this underground sort-of illegal tree dealing club (i know). so my prof went, got a bit of funding from the government, who were getting pissed at independent cucumber tree numbers, and THIS IS WHERE IT GETS INTO THE GOOD SHIT I STS he infitrates the tree trafficking organization. he buys a cucumber tree from an independent nursery, raises it for months, ensures he gets noticed by the traffickers, and then INFILTRATES it and convinces its leader to LET HIM JOIN he has to pay like a steep entrance fee, which he does (and it blows my mind that the government of my country paid money to illegal tree dealers), but then he is given full access to records and maps because they think he's one of them, not now this part blows my mind because the tree lords don't even have to try very hard to find cucumber trees because government agents MARK THE TREES AND DISTINCTLY TAG THEM SAYING THIS IS ENDANGERED DO NOT hangs out with the members so much that he figures out their hit spots". these are where the trees are relatively secluded and unguarded. (he writes all this shit and numbers down for BUT THATS NOT ENOUGH BECAUSE THE GOVT SAYS HES WASTING THEIR FUNDING IF HE DOESNT HAVE PROOF and they are willing to take LEGAL ACTION for misuse of funding (my prof doesn't have the money nore time nor power to take them to court, which would also blow his cover). so my prof literally STAKES OUT a copse of cucumber trees at a recognized wildlife reserve for. DAYS. he camps there, and watches the trees, is about to give up, he's going off an unreliable rumor from the traffickers that a harvester would be going there within the next week. finally, this guy comes and takes the cucumber tree seeds from the CLEARLY MARKED trees by the government, and my prof takes pictures (we are shown these pictures, most of us are speechless at this point). dozens of candid shots of a man my grandpa's age with a grocery store bag, garden shears, and a ladder, clipping away the illegal seeds and then going on his way so my prof has the proof, he's been undercover for months now at this point, he writes up his report, gives it to the government who is likeoh shit", helps them draft up a new LESS COMPLETELY FUCKING OBVious way of marking e wouldn't damage them further, etc.), and then never retuns to the tree traffickers. he'd given them a fake name, address, (so that way there was a full minute of stunned silence from us students at this point, during which he grew more and more nervous (again, he's a muffin) and all of us students are just like whoa. we asked him what happened to the remaining illegal cucumber trees & if he turned the tree dealers in to the government, and that is when he smiles a little bit and shows us the last few pictures. because here's the kicker... he never turned the smugglers in. he burned all the data he collected, defied the government pressuring him to turn them in, and the only reason he's not incarcerated is because his work is so prominent in certain circles now & universities love him, that there would be an uproar if he got arrested. he's like a fucking anti-hero and then he tells us (ill never forget, it's the most inspirational green-thumb thing in the world) "it may be illegal', but those who risk their liberty to-save the world- should never be reprimanded, no matter what we are all stunned. some of us are considering dendrology as a field we'd now be interested in pursuing. he clicks his slide one final time, before we leave our last lecture and, since he had an asthma attack (lil muffin) he didn't attend our exam, so and there, on the slides, the last picture? THERE HE IS. in his own backyard. with his equally lovely TA wife. both grinning GROWN. ILLEGAL. CUCUMBER TREE 72,767 Tree espionage
Save
Anaconda, Anna, and Clothes: 10 ins 111 24% 10:43 AM Thread ti You Retweeted Anna Moone @annamoonesyou trans woman was arrested at Philly Pride for burning a "Blue Lives Matter" flag, and no one is talking about it All the bougie white Cis gays are out dancing with cops while a trans woman iS sitting in jail. Happy fucking pride 6:43 PM 10 Jun 18 14.8K Retweets 37.5K Likes Anna Moone @annamoonesyou Lord knows what bullshit they arrested her on given that the 1989 Supreme Court decision Texas v Johnson made it 100% Explicitly clear that burning a flag is protected free speech and cannot be a crime 602 3,289 30 Tweet your reply 10 ז . ".וזו24% ו-0:43 AM KThread Anna Moone @annamoonesyou . 15h From a friend "a comrade was arrested for trying to burn a blue lives matter flag, she was spotted with lighter fliu & was tackled. Shes being held @ roundhouse police station in Philadelphia to check to see whats happening is 215 686 3304 or 215 686 3305" & the number to call t0 554 1.196 Anna Moone @annamoonesyou 15h unfortunately the trans woman is being held under her deadname and we don t want to share that. So they police will probably say they can't do anything without a name. That said, a bunch of people calling on behalf of "the trans woman arrested at pride" can only help 294 1,197 Anna Moone @annamoonesyou . 13h DONATION INFORMATION For donations: Venmo is ugly-chin-66 & paypal email is thephotonator@ gmail.comm Whichever is better. They will be keeping track of donations so please indicate that in some way! All Tweet your reply 1011 . 니".1111 24%-10:43 AM KThread Anna Moone @annamoonesyou . 13h DONATION INFORMATION For donations: Venmo is ugly-chin-66 & paypal email is thephotonator@ gmail.comm Whichever is better. They will be keeping track of donations so please indicate that in some way! All money not used will be returned or redirected" Source: @phillysocialist FB 3 315 549 Anna Moone @annamoonesyou 2h Update from @phillysocialist FB: "$500 bail posted. We have reached this (actually $1800 ATM) via Venmo and paypal and extra that will most likely go to her housing and court fees or any charges once she's released. Thank you everyone!!! Yay!!" 3 29 185 Anna Moone @annamoonesyou 2h "We also have people waiting outside for her at jail support. Come through or order tood to the site please! Blankets, warm clothes, etc also appreciated." Tweet your reply madsadcatfish: Tweets read: “A trans woman was arrested at Philly Pride for burning a Blue Lives Matter flag, and no one is talking about it. All the bougie white cis gays are out dancing with cops while a trans woman is sitting in jail. Happy fucking pride. Lord knows what bullshit they arrested her on given that the 1989 Supreme Court decision Texas v Johnson made it 100% explicitly clear that burning a flag is protected free speech and cannot be a crime. From a friend: a comrade was arrested for trying to burn a blue lives matter flag, she was spotted with lighter fluid was tackled. She’s being held @ roundhouse police station in Philadelphia the number to call to check to see what’s happening is 215 686 3304 or 215 686 3305.” unfortunately the trans woman is being held under her deadname and we don’t want to share that. So the police will probably say they can’t do anything without a name. That said, a bunch of people calling on behalf of “the trans woman arrested at pride” can only help. DONATION INFORMATION: For donations, Venmo is ugly-chin-66 and PayPal email is thephotonator@gmail.com. whichever is better. They will be keeping track of donations so please indicate that in some way! All money not used will be returned or redirected. Update from Philly Socialist FB: “$500 bail posted. We have reached this (actually $1800 ATM) via Venmo and PayPal and extra that will most likely go to her housing and court fees or any charges once she’s released. Thank you everyone!!! Yay!! We also have people waiting outside for her at jail support. Come through or order food to the site please! Blankets, warm clothes, etc. also appreciated.” Friendly reminder that Pride started as a protest against police brutality. Philly Socialists on Facebook for more info.
Save
Cute, Girls, and Omg: al, AT&T 2:45 PM Messages +1 (646 Edt May 13, 2012 10:50 PM I really had a good time with you. I want to get to know you better. I like you Thanks for the movie night. Get some sleep for the big case tomorrow! You are welcome. Thank you. Get some rest May 14, 2012 12 20 AM Do you want us to get to know each other? I don't want to waste my time. Sorry, I don't think we AT&TS 2:45 PM Messages +1 (646) Edit Sorry, I don't think we really have a connection. Tonight was fun though, thanks. May 14, 2012 1233 AM No problem at all. I don't know how you can know that after a first date. I don't know if we are a match either. But I wanted to get to know you. But no problem May 14, 2012 1.02 AM And by the way, I think it is your loss. I am an amazing guy and would have AT&TS 246 PM Messages +1 (646) Edit May 14, 2012 1:02 AM And by the way, I think it is your loss. I am an amazing guy and would have anything for you. May 14, 2012 153 PM Hey buddy! Sorry I missed your calls. I am just finishing up in Court. Rushing to my office for a 2:30 meeting. I saw the Avengers with her yesterday. She is ok. She is cute but not hot. I have dated much hotter girls. She is a 5.5 out of 10 (average). I wanted to get to know her more thouah Message stal. AT&T 2:46 PM Messages +1 (646) Edit dated much hotter girls. She is a 5.5 out of 10 (average). I wanted to get to know her more though but she sent me a message saying didn't think there was a connection. Can you believe? I was even super nice to her. She is lucky that I went on a date with her. Average chicks are the ones that always act like they are God's gift. Anyway, I am going out with Nancy tonight. About to jump in the subway. Talk to you later bro. AT&T 3:17 PM Edt her. Average chicks are the ones that always act like they are God's gift. Anyway, I am going out with Nancy tonight. About to jump in the subway. Talk to you later bro. May 14, 2012 3:09 PM Hey Candice! I'm very sorry! I just saw this. I meant to send this to a friend but I mistakenly send it to you. It is not about you at all. It is not about you. It is about someone else. I hope you are doing wel. fatanimetitties: pussysista: Omg Holy shiiiiiitttttr
Save
Save
Alive, Beard, and Calvin Johnson: dail alexander Follow drucila616 How Do Court Reporters Keep Straight Faces? These are from a book called Disorder in the Courts and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and published by court reporters that had the torment of staying calm while the exchanges were taking place ATTORNEY: What was the first thing your husband said to you that morning? WITNESS: He said, "Where am I, Cathy? ATTORNEY: And why did that upset you? WITNESS: My name is Susan! ATTORNEY: What gear were you in at the moment of the impact? WITNESS: Gucci sweats and Reeboks ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active? WITNESS: No, Ijust lie there ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth? WITNESS: July 18th ATTORNEY: What year? WITNESS: Every year ATTORNEY: How old is your son, the one living with you? WITNESS: Thirty-eight or thirty-five, I can't remember which ATTORNEY: How long has he lived with you? WITNESS: Forty-five years ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at al WITNESS: Yes ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory? WITNESS: I forget.. ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot? ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning? WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam? ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the 20-year-old, how I5 WITNESS: He's 20, much like your IQ. ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken? WITNESS: Are you shitting me? ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time? WITNESS: Getting laid ATTORNEY: She had three children, right? WITNESS: Yes. ATTORNEY: How many were boys? WITNESS: None. ATTORNEY: Were there any girls? WITNESS: Your Honor, I think I need a different attorney. Can I get a new attorney? ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated? WITNESS: By death. ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated? WITNESS: Take a guess ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual? WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female? WITNESS: Unless the Circus was in town I'm going with male ATTORNEY: Is your appearance here this morning pursuant to a deposition notice which I sent to your attorney? WITNESS: No, this is how I dress when I go to work ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people? WITNESS: All of them. The live ones put up too much ATTORNEY: ALL your responses MUST be oral, OK? What school did you go to? WITNESS: Oral.. ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body? WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 PM ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time? WITNESS: If not, he was by the time I finished. ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample? WITNESS: Are you qualified to ask that question? And last Stitch ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy? WITNESS: No. ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor? WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk ATTORNEY: I see, but could the patient have stili been alive, nevertheless? WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law skrill-cosby oh my god these are great fuck this is like reading a jokes and not actual quotes Source 1,411,980 notes Witness v. Attorney: Dawn of Jokes
Save
Fucking, Music, and Obama: Shannon Carey @scmaestra This moral rehabilitation of GWW Bush is baffling. I was a full grown adult during his presidency Shall we review the highlights? 10:48 PM 19 Oct 17 2,847 Retweets 6,644 Likes Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d Replying to @scmaestra He invaded Afghanistan to route out A Qaeda. So far, conservative estimates put the civilian dead at 165,000. Country is still not stable 12 T t0 201 1,238 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d He invaded Traq on completely falsified grounds, going against the rest of the world. The civilian dead are at least 480,000 11 1,247 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d Since most Americans only care about American lives, here are the US military dead: about 2,400 in Afghanistan and 4,500 in Iraq t 162 1,021 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d He privatized the military, clearing the way for for-profit mercenaries. He appointed Roberts and Alito to the Supreme Court 6 154 1,064 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d He championed No Child Left Behind, placing education in the hands of ed testing corps, eliminating science & history from elem schools 7 167 1,139 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d He also had traits we now see, amplified, in 45. He lied. He spoke terribly and embarrassed us. He was mean to iournalists 8 130 1,062 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d I mean, the world was so happy to get rid of him in 2008 that they gave Obama the freaking Nobel Peace Prize simply because he was NOT BUSH 10 ti 270 2,085 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d GW Bush, Rove, Rumsfeld and Cheney paved this corrupt, profiteering, nationalistic road that 45 is now prancing down 6 t0 310 1,530 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d If GW wants redemption, he's gonna have to do a lot more than paint pictures of soldiers he maimed and make patriotic speeches 8 t 195 1,229 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d Also, Abu Ghraib and the normalization of torture. Which I think I had blocked out, as, it seems, most of us have 13 t0 158 1,320 Parm @ParmB 1d the Patriot ACT, gargantuan DHS, just gutting Iraq via the shittiest privatization attempt making that vacuum for the horrors to come... 41 4 34 361 Shannon Carey @scmaestra 1d He invented "Homeland Security." Homeland?? I mean, that is straight out of the Sound of Music - and I don't mearn the nice Van Trapp:s thank you for this! The bar is now so low that liberals will flock to monstrosities and shower them with adulation simply because they said something about Trump.  This form of political and historical amnesia serves no one but the powerful. We need to have higher fucking standards than this. 
Save
America, Bailey Jay, and Dumb: g If this was another country, we'd have to tell you that this coffee may be hot. Good thing this is Canada okayto: bregma: kevinrfree: charlienight: commanderbishoujo: bogleech: prokopetz: johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel: truthandglory: assbanditkirk: whoa canada someone needs to turn down that sass level Two things to know about Canada! We are smart enough to know hot things should be hot. We are sorry if you don’t fun story about the reason they do that (at least in America) once this lady spilled her McDonald’s coffee on herself and ended up getting like 3rd degree burns and since there was no warning on the cup she was able to claim she didn’t know it would be hot (or at least that hot) and won a lawsuit against McDonald’s for $1 million That’s what the media smear campaign against her would have you believe, anyway. The truth of the matter is that the McDonald’s in question had previously been cited - on at least two separate occasions - for keeping their coffee so hot that it violated local occupational health and safety regulations. The lady didn’t win her lawsuit because American courts are stupid; she won it because the McDonald’s she bought that coffee from was actively and knowingly breaking the law with respect to the temperature of its coffee at the time of the incident. (I mean, do you have any idea what a third-degree burn actually is? Third-degree burns involve “full thickness” tissue damage; we’re talking bone-deep, with possible destruction of tissue. Can you even imagine how hot that cup of coffee would have to have been to inflict that kind of damage in the few seconds it was in contact with her skin?) Yeah I’m tired of people joking about either the “stupid” woman who didn’t know coffee was hot or the “greedy” woman making up bullshit to get money. She was hideously injured by hideous irresponsibility, it was an absolutely legitimate lawsuit and the warning on the cups basically allows McDonalds to claim no responsibility even if it happens again. Every other company followed suit to cover their asses. So they can still legally serve you something that could sear off the end of your tongue or permanently demolish the front of your gums and just give you a big fat middle finger in court. “The label SAID it would be HOT, STUPID.” obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist teh facts on this case and get public opinion against the victim was deliberate and fueled by the right wing tort reform movement it was seized upon to limit the rights of consumers to hold giant corporations accountable for wrongdoing watch the documentary Hot Coffee, it lays out all of the facts and examines the response to this case and explains why everything you think you know about this case is bullshit, and explains why tort reform is bullshit in an entertaining and informative manner The woman injured in Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants was 79 years old at the time of her injuries, and suffered third-degree burns to the pelvic region (including her thighs, buttocks, and groin), which in combination with lesser burns in the surrounding regions caused damage to an area totaling a whopping 22% of her body’s surface. These injuries that required two years of intensive medical care, including multiple skin grafts; during her hospitalization, Stella Liebeck lost around 20% of her starting body weight. She was uninsured and sued McDonald’s Restaurants for the cost of her past and projected future medical care, an estimated $20,000. The corporation offered a settlement of $800, a number so obviously ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with any further explanation. The settlement number most often quoted is not the amount that the corporation actually paid; the jury in the first trial suggested a payment equal to a day or two of coffee revenues for McDonald’s, which at the time totaled more than $1 million per diem. The judge reduced the required payout to around $640,000 in both compensatory and punitive damages, and the case was later settled out of court for less than $600,000. Keep in mind that at the time, McDonald’s already had over 700 cases of complaints about coffee-related burns on file, but continued to sell coffee heated to nearly 200 degrees Fahrenheit (around 90 degrees Celsius) as a means of boosting sales (their selling point was that one could buy the coffee, drive to a second location such as work or home, and still have a piping hot beverage). This in spite of the fact that most restaurants serve coffee between 140 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit (60 to 71 degrees Celsius), and many coffee experts agree that such high temperatures are desirable only during the brewing process itself. The Liebeck case was absolutely not an example of litigation-happy Americans expecting corporations to cover their asses for their own stupidity, but we seem determined to remember it that way. It’s an issue of liability, and the allowable lengths of capitalism, and even of the way in which our society is incredibly dangerous for and punitive towards the uninsured, but it was not and is not a frivolous suit. Please check your assumptions and do your research before you turn a burn victim’s suffering into a throwaway punchline. #don’t fricking get me started on Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants the level of misinformation floating around is staggering#I know that it’s an older case but it still makes me really mad that people treat it as this big dumb thing?#the fact that the media took a serious case and turned it into what it is to us today should piss people off#the level of distortion of facts is astonishing and upsetting and nobody seems to hear about it?#sorry I’m done I just#it upsets me when a legal travesty like this is just dragged out for some#’haha americans are sOOOOOOOo dumb!!1!’ humor#I MEAN GODDAMN IF YOU’RE GOING TO MAKE FUN OF AMERICANS AT LEAST MAKE FUN OF US WITH FACTS OKAY jesus, i actually didn’t know about any of this, thanks for clearing that up Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants at the American Museum of Tort Law The McDonald’s Hot Coffee Case: Know the Facts at Consumer Attorneys of California
Save