sell your ride
post your service
sell your stuff
post your class
browse all jobs
post a job
homes for sale
for sale by owner
post your listing
If you're looking for "I Spys," dating or LTRs, this is your scene.
If you're looking for full-on kink or group play, you'll get what you need here.
Sadly, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
We, and by extension copse, can only do so much. If someone chooses to hurt themselves in the privacy of their own home then that's just something we have to be willing to live with. We can attempt to talk them down or trick them into giving us an opening to subdue them. But if things get heated and subduing them is no longer a possibility then we need to back off. A life-taking like this should be the rare exception NOT the rule. But the statistics in this country say otherwise.
To those who support the actions of the police, I ask, “Why are you unwilling to examine the basic fact that this event simply would not have happened in a country (like England) where police actually live up to the "protect and serve" motto? Isn't it a possibility that your judgement is tainted by the fact that you operate within a system that presupposes a completely different set of values? Might it be a worthwhile exercise to imagine a different way of doing things? Or, better yet, to actually look at the techniques in use in countries where cops don't go around murdering multiple people a day, year-in and year-out?
The point here is that non-violent alternatives were available yet these alternatives were cast aside in favor of aggressive action. As a helpful analogy, I ask, "Is it OK if cops execute a person standing on a bridge contemplating suicide?" Absolutely not! Police are supposed to offer that person their support and do what they can to prevent them from jumping and/or hurting others. They are NOT supposed to shoot them in cold blood! I’m not believer, but these cops "played god". Like so many before them, they stepped over the line, moving from protector to executioner. Naturally, I want police to protect people from themselves and others but there's a limit. Looking critically, it was the police who escalated a tense standoff situation by breaking into the man's apartment when all they needed to do was wait outside and observe. Folks who work in psychiatric hospitals don't go around murdering distraught patients and neither should the police!
I have two responses to this senseless and totally unnecessary cold blooded murder:
British police versus man with kitchen knife: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fvbcBZQ_9…
British police versus man with machete: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cX5CPx4RKW…
Or, even more obvious: Station a couple of officers and a mental health expert outside the guy's apartment door (the only means of ingress/egress), send everybody else on their way and wait. Would that have been so hard? Instead we waste untold man-hours and end up with a tragic death. What a terrible waste all around!
This is police work at its absolute worst, but this kind of thing is far from infrequent:
Finally. Lets hope both dirt and paved roads are next.
As for Gov. Shumlin's alleged comment, and aside from its overtly racist undertones (particularly when uttered by a white guy), the fact that he apparently views an advocate for clean water as someone who needs to be brought into line speaks volumes. That one turn of phrase would seem to expose serious contradiction between his public persona (as manifested by his recent inaugural speech) and his private intentions.
Could it be that he's just not that into clean water?
Sure, clean water is an easy thing to stump on but like I've written elsewhere, delving into what it takes to really achieve it requires some serious soul searching. And I realize that being governor is no walk in the park but its a job that comes with certain base responsibilities, not the least of which is ensuring that the State's water supply isn't being compromised by nutrient pollution or contamination from industrial toxics. On those fronts we're currently 0 for 2 and so here's hoping that our governor shakes off whatever it is that's causing him to shun those with answers and that he instead starts offering up his support to same. Clean water isn't and should never be a political issue. So how sad it is when someone who insists on clean water gets characterized by so many as anything other than a hero.
Now, to all of those people who think that James is acerbic: be happy that you're not in the position of having to placate one of the ~750,000,000 people worldwide that don't have access to drinkable water. At least we can still drink our water. At least for right now. But how do you think the dynamic will change when the tables turn? How 'bout we don't go there?
This is somewhat devastating - Councilor Jane Knodell is quoted as saying in relation to the Citigroup windup, ""I felt like we should have asked harder questions." Excuse me, but if there was ever an deal or issue that the council should have asked hard questions about it is this one. I am sure that folks elected both her and her fellow council members on the basis that they would do just that, ask the hard questions about the highly controversial BT. And now to find out that this wasn't done; why wasn't this done? I know that the council is overwhelmed by all of the various tasks it has in front of it but surely this one was one that demanded total focus? Sigh.
And, for the record, I am a proponent of efforts to "Keep BT Local":
All Comments »