DogofWar1

Dang, Holly is getting her licks in.

I'm sure she, like everyone else in the Bantamweight division, likes her arms where they are with the angles they're at. Unfortunately for her, they're not her arms anymore.

This is okay, not great. Aldo v. McGregor, however, is gonna be siiiiick. Saw a very appropriate drinking game for Rousey fight. Chug until it's done. Probably will barely get buzzed.

Not so much batteries, but as nighttime energy. PV Solar supplies grid during the day, energy from PV solar powers fuel cells at night. But that's not the only potential setup. We agree on diversity, the future of energy is exciting. Hopefully we can work out the issues and get alternatives rolling before the Middle East has heat waves killing thousands daily.

Fuel cells have a fair number of technological developmental hurdles to overcome as well. Certainly there's strong potential there too, but in terms of utility solar will probably get there first, though fuel cells could still have a role to play, as sort of nighttime batteries. But there are at least as many hurdles to the creation of a widespread hydrogen economy as there are to the creation of a widespread solar economy. I had been hopeful through the mid-2000's to late 2000's, but the growth of the industry started reversing. Just like solar, the tech wasn't there. Solar has been making leaps and bounds, I know hydrogen has made some too, but I've heard much less. Both have hurdles remaining. Of course, there's no reason not to investigate multiple forms of energy. Invest in solar, fuel cells, thorium fission, and fusion. Picking one over the other is hardly necessary. Indeed, perhaps a future space faring humanity could utilize mass solar energy through a dyson swarm in the inner solar system, while utilizing fusion/thorium/fuel cells farther from the sun, outside the asteroid belt.

This is a reasonable assessment, though I would say it's a little bit less the rulebook (still the rulebook some), and a little more a justice system that has begun to value punishment and numbers over, well, justice. (I'd also disagree about this specific case with regards to violations of policy, though I think you're right that the rulebook would have been interpreted very loosely and in the Officer's favor if not for public outrage). I think the system is changing though, back when the Rodney King beatings happened, videotaped instances of excessive force were nonexistent. Now we're seeing them weekly if not quicker. Combined with the slow creeping understanding that long sentences for non-violent offenses make no sense, I think the justice system is changing for the better.

Cute. Plenty of detailed things are happening, solar has gone from a pipe dream with regards to utilities to actually being marketable, and is only going to keep improving over time. The issues standing in the way are solvable, one simply needs to stop saying we should scrap the whole thing because some issues pop up. And it's not really ignoring much, the energy requirements of a fully developed world would be huge. Wind, geothermal, tidal, fission, etc. could certainly power us for a time, but eventually even that would be insufficient. World energy needs have increased 10 fold since the early 1900s, and that's just to get the current crop of countries to the first world. China still has tons of development to go. India has a long ways. Africa has many parts of the country with significant development still to go. And the first world is going to keep developing further and pushing out new technologies that will continue to increase energy needs. It's estimated that about 4 million 5 megawatt wind turbines could provide half the 2030 world's energy, about 7.5 terrawatts. The thing is, if in 100 years we've multiplied our energy usage another tenfold, that means we'd need 40 million 5 megawatt wind turbines. Problem is the anticipated maximum energy from wind on land is about 80 terrawatts, and 40 million wind turbines producing 75 terrawatts would presumably by utilizing over 90% of potential land production. If we could cover the seas in wind turbines, it's another couple hundred terrawatts, but the engineering difficulties increase many fold. So wind is very useful in the 50 year time frame, but on the 100+ year timescale it becomes too small. Tidal energy, geothermal, hydro, and biomass all in at potentials lower than wind. This is a pretty basic overview in picture form: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Global_Energy_Potential_2014_08_09.svg Thorium based nuclear fission could be a potential option, reserves could presumably last the US around 1,000 years based on some studies. But that's at current power levels. If power usage increased several fold that would decrease the time it would work significantly. So what are we left with? Well, barring some breakthrough elsewhere, we're stuck with fusion, which is not even known to be feasible, let alone mature, and solar, which despite your opposition, is rapidly maturing (the biggest obstacle now is likely energy storage more than anything else). The latter of which, purely on Earth, provides something like 1,500 times the current world's energy usage, per year. So, one way or another, if you're betting on energy bet on solar, and while we're at it, we can help to reduce global warming, and maybe save ourselves some environmental grief and the costs associated with that.

In the same vein as the SC situation: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/11964823/Moment-Oklahoma-city-police-officer-punches-student-in-the-face.html?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook

You're asking the wrong guy those questions. Have you seen the green jobs thread? He goes out of his way to poo-poo every potential advance as really not good, at best, and terrible, at worst. But yes, you're right, there are plenty of new jobs to be created in the green energy sector, and more importantly, unless humanity gets wiped out sometime in the next 100 years (hopefully not), we will literally NEED to go to renewable fuels, and likely the sun, as humanity's energy needs will outstrip non-renewable supply. Either they need to figure out cold fusion or we're going to be using solar, because those two sources are basically the only two that could possibly support a civilization that has pulled most nations to the 1st world and likely is space-faring. Edit: Helping with the whole climate change thing is an added benefit of getting where we're going to need to go anyway faster.

I think everyone agrees that the girl deserves some penalty for instigating the whole thing, punishments discussed have run from in-school suspension to expulsion. But do you really feel that the level of force he used is the system working as intended? I mean, how many thousands of school resource officers are there in the US? There are some bad eggs, but the vast and overwhelming majority seem to be able to enforce school policies, laws, and protect students while not flipping desks and dragging people.

Alien 5 officially on hold. Sounds like, best case, it'll get picked up again quickly after P2. Worst case, it won't and will die. Very much hoping for the former. http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/10/30/director-neill-blomkamp-announces-alien-5-on-hold?utm_source=IGN%20hub%20page&utm_medium=IGN%20(front%20page)&utm_content=3&utm_campaign=Blogroll

Come on now. It's one thing to question studies and even journal methodology, that's fine, keeping everyone honest is good. It's quite another to basically say that the 2nd highest rated journal in the environmental sciences area of study, and tied to the very well regarded Nature Publishing Group is crap on par with the World Daily News.

Good reason and legal to a point. Methodology matters, and from a police protocol perspective he screwed up. With regards to the civil rights investigation and suit from the girl, we'll see. What would they need to do to make the firing "proper" under your standards?

They fired him after the completion of the internal affairs investigation. That's about as proper as it can get, and they certainly didn't have an "excuse" to fire him, they had good reason to.

Unapproved method, which is outside the appropriate level of force. And are you suggesting internal affairs ignored facts and fired him without the full story? Because presumably they would have the full story. And they still fired him.

Right, you mean like the detail of her striking him that came out a little over a day ago and got plastered everywhere, but wasn't this phantom elbow strike? You're implying the media is in the bag for the girl. If that was true, her strike of him wouldn't have generated new stories. An elbow strike would have been mentioned alongside or as another story. You think giving the pro-officer side what they wanted wouldn't generate clicks? Heck, even the websites trying to defend the cop haven't put up stories about elbow crotch shots. They didn't report on it because there's no evidence it happened. Moreover, even if it did happen, and no one reported on it (extremely unlikely), the internal affairs people would have heard about it, and they still concluded he violated policy and fired him. So if an elbow strike actually happened, it works against your viewpoint, since that means even 2 strikes against the cop wasn't enough to move up the use-of-force continuum, which suggests that moving up the use of force continuum is not only harder to do than you've been painting, but even harder than I have.

The grabbing of the arm was part of the move where he moved his left arm down across her body to grab her legs, which the ill advised choke-hold was seemingly a part of. Moreover, there was no elbow strike by her. The officer pulls her arm out to the left, and he then reaches across her body with his left arm. Her arm, partially obscurred, appears to fall, and there is definitely no clear elbow strike. Moreover, none of the stories on major news sites discuss an elbow strike. They talk about the strike from her right hand, which was with the hand, not the elbow, but no mention of elbow is there. I searched google specifically for "elbow" with a few other terms related to the incident (Ben Fields "elbow", girl classroom officer "elbow", etc.). The two mentions of an elbow strike are from a comment section on an article (the article you posted a day back about a 3rd video, but not in the article itself), and a forum posting on a politics forum which has a youtube video defending the officer and speculating that she elbowed him, but nothing beyond speculation to back it up. So there's no elbow strike to justify the actions after that, and the strike by the girl after the choke-hold is not the 2nd strike, it was the first, in response to the choke-hold. And if by slinging her away you mean flipping the desk and then dragging her from it, yes, we agree that's what got him. The choke-hold, though ill advised, was something that could have been rectified. Him going farther got him.

The key difference between soft technique and hard technique is pretty self evident, and you're being silly suggesting the desk flip is soft technique. Soft technique involves grabs, holds, and joint locks. Hard technique involves punches and kicks. The difference is obvious, soft involves restraining techniques, hard involves empty hand impacts. It's the empty hand equivalent of the next step up, blunt impact instruments (like batons). Now which side is flipping a desk closer to? I'll answer that for you, it's closer to hard. Heck, if one views the desk as an instrument, it's almost a step ABOVE hard technique. But we'll keep it at hard technique because it is utilizing an impact, not a mere restraint. And again, you keep ignoring the OBVIOUS middle grounds in conduct he could have taken, purely to support your clearly indefensible position. He attempted a single hold, one which likely was ill advised in the first instance, being a choke-hold, and then proceeded to go straight into slamming her. As I've mentioned before, he could have tried an armbar, or picked her up from behind underneath her arms. He didn't need to drag her into the hallway, desk and all, or disengage and wait, or use a taser (which would have been even worse). Just because YOU cannot fathom alternative options to what the cop did that would both continued physical engagement AND in line with police protocol does not mean that such alternative options did not exist. The Sheriff's action and discussion demonstrate that. At the end of the day, your narrow minded view of options is woefully insufficient compared to reality, and leads to you being flatly wrong. The cop was fired. He was wrong in his actions. Your arguments contort logic and reason into fallacies and irrationality. If you were right, he would still be employed today. He's not. You're wrong.

There is no evidence that a swing occurred before the officer began initiating physical contact, the strike from her was not until he had her in the choke-hold and was lifting her. That's where the swing in the 3rd video comes from. You have absolutely no understanding of anything with regards to police protocol or authorization regarding force, as demonstrated by the fact that you seem to not be able to grasp the very basic concept that there are levels of force in between verbal commands and flipping a desk with a girl in it. I'm gonna post the quote from the article on the use of force continuum I posted earlier, which you clearly haven't read nor care to understand, because you keep persisting in this "If he can't flip desks and drag her, what use does he have?" garbage that makes no sense. From http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/pages/continuum.aspx Now, for this incident, to make this very simple to understand, we started here: This was insufficient, so he moved here: This too failed, which is the point where the officer is SUPPOSED to go here: but instead went here: If you listened CRITICALLY to the Sheriff yesterday, you'd have gotten this analysis out of it too. He was allowed to move to soft technique. Choke-holds, however, are, at best, dancing along the line between the two (NYC ban), and his subsequent flipping of the desk was clearly hard technique. And no, he doesn't get to move to hard technique because she slapped at him when she was put in a choke-hold, because based on her size, weight, and potential threat level, soft technique was still perfectly reasonable to subdue her. If, after the slap, he then attempted further soft technique, grabbing her arm, attempting to lift her under her arms from behind, and she continued striking him, and especially if she did so in a manner that appeared threatening to her classmates, THEN he'd have been authorized to move to hard technique. But again, he skipped a step which as per his training he wasn't supposed to, which was a violation of police protocol, and was fired for it.

Whichever ones would be reasonable based on a slow movement up the use of force continuum. As the Sheriff said, once verbal commands fail, he was allowed to put his hands on her, something a teacher might not, and a parent (not her parent) definitely isn't, allowed to do (her own parents have some leeway...but they also are dead I think...so there's that). Not a problem there, and that's where the cops are useful and can take actions beyond teachers, principals, and other parents. However, there are different levels of "putting hands on somebody," and flipping the desk and dragging the kid exceeded what was necessary and reasonable in the situation. Hence the firing.

What he's saying happened didn't happen. The only strike from the girl is after the officer has her in the choke-hold and is lifting her up. Everything else is imagined, or somehow that strike after the choke is time traveling through a wormhole on its way from the screen to his eyes and happening before other things in the video that actually come before it. I'm not a scientist and/or the Doctor though, so I'm not the guy to ask about the mechanics behind the quantum tunneling or whatever that's happening.

Eh, teenagers, in most situations might know what is reasonable and what's not, but there are gaps in that reasonableness. The brain continues developing well into legal adulthood, and isn't "fully" developed until around age 25. And that's without rough external factors heaped on top of that.

Yeah, the kid was disruptive and action was necessary, and she definitely is going to face some serious action by the school, likely a suspension, though I think expulsion only exacerbates the issues she's facing at home. Ideally once everything has been resolved her punishment would take into account the difficulties she's facing. Of course, the officer went WAYYYY too far in his action, hence the firing.

Sorta. Gotta put them in prison first. That pipeline isn't going to sustain itself. EDIT: And he's out. Girl was a jerk, and soft empty hand technique was fine, but Fields went way beyond that as per Sheriff's statement and internal affairs report.

Apparently we'll find out at noon what happens to him, press conference is supposed to be then. NBCNews is reporting that sources are saying he'll be fired, but I'm waiting for the conference for final confirmation one way or another.