@mozz@mbin.grits.dev cover

"You know, you can't have sex with animals. You can own them. You can kill them. You can eat them. But you can't fuck them." -Bobby Fingers

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. View on remote instance

mozz ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar
  1. An "officer came running up to her vehicle yelling for her to stop. ... Rogers 'panicked and drove the wrong way' down a bus-only lane." Assuming that's accurate, then if the police tell you to stop, and you drive your vehicle away, they're probably going to get physical with you once they catch up to you. That's their job. Their only alternative to responding with physical force at that point is to just shrug shoulders and say "O well we tried" and let someone drive around "panicked" in unexpected places in an environment where little school children are walking around.
  2. I do not understand why it's difficult to find just the long, unedited cut of the bodycam footage of what happened. Every single video I was able to find is this weirdly intercut and looped version which focuses on the one part that everyone agrees happened, where you can't really see the context, and then it's overlaid over someone's interpretation of what happened, which is a whole bunch of irritating bullshit.
  3. With #2 in mind as a caveat, I think that reading between the lines, what happened is that they stopped her car by blocking it with their cars, pulled her out, put her on the ground to handcuff her, she started screaming about ants, and then after 13 seconds they pulled her up. Then she started struggling, and they put her back on the ground and held her there in the ant pile for a long time while they hogtied her, and that's where all the carpet of ant bites in the photo came from.
  4. I am far from an ACAB person, but I do not understand what goes on in US police training that if someone's actively struggling with you, you need to start hurting them until they calm down. I've seen this reaction over and over in police videos, and I think I have literally never once seen it be successful at the supposed goal. It's just not how people operate. I get it that you need to use force if someone's using force against the police to try to avoid getting arrested. That part actually makes sense to me. But the part where someone's resisting getting arrested, and the cops start hurting them and then usually seem for-real surprised that now they're struggling more, is genuinely confusing to me how they can't figure it out.
mozz , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

I don't need to; I'm already a connoisseur of Youtube videos with titles like "When entitled suspects attack" or whatever. My observation is that the wrist lock usually converts an angry and struggling person yelling "grahgabgbabrbrae" into an angry and struggling person yelling "grahbcdsbfsdhfbYOURE BREAKING MY ARMsdfkjsdflsdf"

Like I say, this might make me some kind of asshole in Lemmy-world but I am usually not on team suspect. I think if you drive away from the police, or start struggling when they try to put handcuffs on you, the police getting physical with you isn't automatically a sign that they're terrible people and ACAB. That is literally their job at that point, and you're definitely still going to get arrested, just with everyone's day including yours getting worse as a result, and more charges now maybe a felony. I feel like the whole ACAB mentality has blown up the few times a year that one cop somewhere in the country does something really fucked up into this idea that 100% of cops are terrible people and any situation that goes wrong in any way where they're involved is 100% their fault; I don't think that's true. But definitely I do feel like a cop approaching someone who's not on board with what's going on by punishing them and expecting them to get more on board with it as a result is weird.

(One guy had a series called "Verbal Judo" which I liked quite a lot)

mozz ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Some of them. In my direct experience, the number who've behaved that way is 0, though.

I think taking the worst of the police that are findable in a whole country's worth of bodycam footage, and then assigning blame to every single police person based on those people, makes about as much sense as a policeman putting on an "ASAB" patch for "all suspects are bastards," because a certain subset of the people he encounters are pieces of shit, and then deciding that every single person on the "other side" that he interacts with is the enemy.

I mean, some police do do that. I don't think they should. I don't think either that every single person who chooses to do a vitally necessary job for a living becomes the enemy the instant they decide to do that.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Raw milk is not inherently dangerous

Unless there's some sort of deadly disease commonly involved in it (which, in the American food supply right now, is what's up.)

I mean bullets are not inherently dangerous either, but if the environment you're going into involves them moving at high speeds sometimes, you probably want to take some precautions about it.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

That’s just lies made up by Big Copper

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

No, Big Chopper speaks only the truth

mozz ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

"Oh man. What did they get him for?"

"Wife corruption."

"Oh, shit. Worst kind."

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

So one part:

The protests in support of Gaza are testing the bounds of students’ rights to free speech

This was not the viewpoint that led to the creation of the first amendment and all. The actual viewpoint of the founding fathers was that certain things are just inseparable parts of being human -- you're going to talk with people around you, if you're so inclined.

It's not for a government to "regulate" what people are and aren't allowed to say to one another, any more than they could regulate how many bones are in the body. A lot of those foundational documents weren't meant to lay out what the government would and wouldn't allow people to do and the boundaries of government's permissible control -- they were simple acknowledgements of the reality that they were outside the possible control of any government, and that a government that tried to tell people they could say certain things to each other but not other things, was engaged in an impossibility (as well as betraying its own illegitimacy to govern).

mozz OP , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

"You shoulda been down at City Hall sixty thousand a you ... fuckin booing and throwing batteries at the guy who suggested it"

-Doug Stanhope

mozz ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Constables are not cops, in general. IDK how exactly it works in Texas and it looks like it's actually more similar than it usually is, but as a general rule in practice, constables are sort of the "civil matter" version of police (who are chiefly for criminal matters) -- they serve evictions and summonses, child support warrants, traffic detail like in this case, that kind of thing.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

If you only want to consume news that someone with a bunch of spare money is willing to pay to have you hear, you're embarking on a process that eventually leads to you and lots of other people not really knowing what's going on.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Get a gift card and a proton.me address, maybe? IDK

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Have fun having all your (and everyone else's) media supplied by the Koch Brothers because you didn't feel like finding someone worth paying $7/month to

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

On my screen it says "Mods are encouraging the users to unintentionally undermine journalism as a workable endeavor, when it's already badly struggling in this country." What's yours say?

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

You would describe the current state of the US, and the way the majority of the people in it view the world and how they understand what's going on and what they should do (about climate change, about politics and who to support), to be no problem?

Or you think that where people get their news and their understanding of the world plays no part in the massive problems that are at work in the country?

I'm not trying to get into a big back and forth with you about it. You can have your own opinion on those things and you're welcome to it. But it's not at all a petty thing (to me at least), and it's not any kind of outlandish threat -- it is the simple present day reality. In my opinion.

mozz OP , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Dude I'm super condescending, I know. Sorry if I was coming across insulting which I probably was. But the whole mindset of, we better dodge the paywalls every chance we get, (edit: which, whether it's intended this way or not, might as well translate to) "lol get fucked people who produce the news who are going out of business left and right" irritates me.

I think your mindset of (edit: corrected the quote) "I’ve been having no problem avoiding them for free for decades" and not being interested apparently in looking further into it than that, is harmful. I explained why, probably with more hostility than needed to be there. But I still think it's harmful.

Edit: Made some edits to try to be more fair minded about it

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

🗼       🏇

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

I fixed my comment to make more of an effort at fairness, then. Cheers.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Ha, I'd like to keep arguing but it seems that me and the Beehaw mods / community simply don't see this issue the same way. Is ok.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Yeah, that's fair -- if there's a huge variety of news sources posted, so that the model is that you subscribe to /c/news but have to pay $50/month to all sorts of places to actually read the articles (even to subscribe the main sources posted), then it's a problem.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

If you really feel like the Seattle Times knowing your real name is a catastrophe, you can buy one of those Vanilla Visa gift cards and use that for the subscription. I think that's not necessary, but it's certainly an option.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

He means reduce wages by $500/month to account for the existence of the program

It's a valid question I think; I kind of suspect that it doesn't work that way (that the outcome would be more similar to "wah nobody wants to work for $12/hr anymore" and no workers), but I don't know enough to say for sure.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Well, they do reduce wages based on anything and everything that they can get away with. If they're already getting away with paying people $10/hr or whatever, I think it's easily plausible that they would realize they can now get away with paying them minimum wage. I don't think it's instantly rich people propaganda or a silly concern. Like for example, Wal-Mart among other places definitely pays less because they've factored in that people can go on government assistance and stay just barely above water even receiving drowning wages.

Like I say, I don't think it'll work out this way in practice (in fact I would expect that it would raise wages because it would reduce people's desperation and give them options beyond just taking whatever they could find for as many hours as they can stay awake) and it seems on the limited test like it doesn't. But it doesn't strike me as automatically a weird question or anything.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Search deep within yourself of what you know of the American state

You know which is the answer

It has been with you, all this time

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Yeah it is 100% because of massive chicken and beef farms. I saw some scientists who study these diseases say basically, this is an important enough issue (and is going to keep happening for as long as we're doing factory chicken farming) that we should be transitioning away from factory chickens and back to small independent farms that don't create such perfect petri dishes for human-harmful diseases. Sadly their advice has a 0% change of being implemented before something really, really bad happens because of it.

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

I bet he won't be facing 5 years

mozz OP ,
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Jesus Christ

I expected it to be corrupt, but I didn't expect it to be that corrupt.

mozz OP , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

It doesn't say, which is a little weird. This article explains it better.

Basically as I understand it, before the 1980s, the government owned a lot of the housing and rented it to people at fixed prices. This meant that renting your property out purely for profit was tough, and a lot of landlords actually sold their property to the government as council housing. That changed under Thatcher, who enabled private sales of the council housing, which originally sounded like a good idea (you can own the home you're already living in instead of renting it from the government), but increased privatization led to rent for profit led to inflation of monthly rent led to oh no.

The simple fix I suspect, is for the government to start buying up properties again for rent-at-reasonable-prices to tenants, competing with private landlords and poking a hole in the bubble of ever-increasing rents (with popping the bubble giving a lot of extra leverage of societal benefit as compared with the amount of money they're actually putting into the system.)

mozz OP , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Where are you getting this? To me it looks like household size dropped precipitously between 1947 and 1990, and then stabilized around 2.6 in 1990, and now it's around 2.5. I think rent has gone up a little more than 4% since 1990 though.

I actually would guess that you're probably right about an increase in single people or couples or empty nesters as compared with big families, but that it's been offset by a rise in young or semi-young adults living with roommates. That's just me guessing though.

mozz , (edited )
@mozz@mbin.grits.dev avatar

Sewer lines need to be vented in order not to create a pressure differential that causes problems. There are a couple different approaches, but that shit isn't one of them; it kind of looks like something a plumber just threw in there to solve their immediate problem and then scooted away from free of consequence.

I wouldn't recommend plugging it, as you might be taking away a needed vent from the whole system... the two options I could see would be:

  • Hire a plumber to fix the bullshit in more proper fashion
  • Replace that rubber hose at the end with a longer hose, and put the open end at the bottom of a bucket that you keep filled with water (either in the sink or on the ground). You're effectively creating a weird custom type of P-trap. It's ghetto but it'll solve the smell problem while still allowing pressure to equalize, I think. You might want to ask your plumber if that would be a sensible solution just to double-check.
  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • All magazines