The government officials that are trying to play 'not it' and refuse to have anyone actually answer questions as to their actions are just being courteous you see. After all, they know that the questioning would be a total waste of time, due to the fact that whoever was being questioned would just lie about everything, so they figure it would save everyone some time and energy to just skip that part.
The first two questions out of any negotiators' mouths when a new trade agreement is proposed should always be:
-Who, specifically, will benefit from the proposed changes?
-How, exactly, will the changes help them?
As the US/Colombia trade agreement discussed here shows, 'increased trade' is only a good thing when both sides are getting something from it, and while I'm sure the US farmers are enjoying the changes, sounds like the local Colombian farmers are hurting quite badly from the changes, making the 'agreement' very much a one-sided deal.
You're much safer with the criminals vs the cops, if for no other reason than you can defend yourself from the first group.
If a 'regular' criminal tries to rob or attack you, you can defend yourself, but if a cop does it and you try and defend yourself... hope you enjoy the mace, taser, baton, jail time and assault charges.
I really, really hope none of the officers involved in this are married or have kids, if they can honestly get on the stand and argue that 'he was asking for it' and that it's the murder victims fault for them beating him to death due to his 'life choices', I don't want to think of how they'd treat their spouses and/or children.
The main 'tech' connection in articles like this would probably be how technology has leveled the playing field more.
Before cameras and recording devices were commonly used, it was a simple matter of 'cop vs witnesses(assuming there were any)' and the cop was almost always taken at their word, even if they had a terrible reputation. With the increasing number of camera-phones and other things that can take videos though, suddenly you've got videos(like in this case) where what is being shown, and what was claimed by the police, are very much at odds with each other.
Then of course as an offshoot of that you've got stories where police will steal the cameras/recording devices from witnesses/bystanders, in the name of 'preserving evidence'(evidence which seems to have a shocking tendency to disappear or be corrupted while in police hands funnily enough), or object to being recorded to such a degree that they'll arrest or harass those doing so(in addition to stealing the device doing the recording).
The biggest problem with a competitor to youtube popping up, to snag all the people who hate youtube but are stuck with it, is the only reason youtube survived the barrage of lawsuits and threats against it is that it had the insanely rich google company bankrolling their legal defense.
They could afford to pay top-notch lawyers, they could afford to spend the massive court fees from multiple appeals and cases, they could afford to pay people to do nothing but represent them in court, however a smaller company on the other hand would not be able to do any of this, and would swiftly be crushed via the system.
Probably the best example of this was Veoh, that, despite winning every single case filed against it, was still run into the ground and bankrupted, because every time they won the other side would just appeal or sue them again, and the court fees eventually reached the point where Veoh simple couldn't pay them.
You severely underestimate the stupidity of some game publishers.
Even with him actively making games better, it's just a matter of time until one of the companies fails to restrain their lawyers enough and they send off a nasty-gram threatening him with all sorts of things for 'violating their copyright over their game' or some such rot.
The chain reaction from something like that could be quite entertaining.
1) Company A threatens him for 'hacking' their games or some equally ridiculous reason.
2) He then tells everyone that due to the threat he will no longer make patches for games from Company A.
3) Due to his popularity, lots of PC gamers hear about the threat from Company A, react with boycott, angry posting/commenting, spreading the news of the threat.
4) Profit!(For everyone but Company A)
Conversely, if a company wanted to generate a lot of goodwill, they could offer him a 'bounty' or reward, like their next PC port/release, for free every time he released a patch for one of their games.
Worst case scenario? He isn't interested in the game offered enough to play it or patch it, and they 'lose' a single purchase that they might have otherwise had. This however is offset by gamers hearing about a company being awesome to a fan that made their games better, making them more likely to buy from them.
Best case scenario? He not only patches the game, making it even better, for free, and gamers hear about the company being awesome to a fan like that, he likes the game enough to tell other people to check it out, significantly increasing sales at the 'cost' of a single copy of the game.
All I can say is 'about time' and 'took them long enough'. The USG(not necessarily the US people mind you, most of which have as much control over the government as a random citizen from another nation would) has and will continue to believe that it is the most important nation on the planet until other countries take a stand and stop bowing to it's demands.
No, that is the last thing that should be happening, as that would give the police in this case some justification for the over-reaction, and you can bet they'd lay the blame on her for 'inciting violence', which would just likely end up with her in a cell.
As long as it's just phone calls, or other non-violent methods of protest/criticism, the police will be the ones looking bad if they escalate it, but the second you get someone physically attacking the police over the matter, you can bet the PR guys in the department would be all over that, and things would swing the other way.
Oh I'm sure she handed over the phone willingly*, so probably not.
*'Willingly' in this instance meaning after being presented with the threats of a fine, being arrested again, maybe a little time 'cooling off' in a cell for 'obstructing justice' if she refused to hand over the 'evidence'/camera.
If the US position is drastically different from every other country on almost every issue, and (as should be completely obvious by now) they have no intention whatsoever of any real compromises that aren't 'do everything my way', then just boot the US from the negotiations and continue on as normal.
Yup, just like no-one buys paperback books anymore since ebooks came out.
Just like no one buys books at all once it became possible to download them for free.
In the short-term a move like this might indeed decrease book sales, but I think long term it will likely increase them, as people discover new and different authors that they'd previously never heard of, due to being able to try their works for free.
There are real guns with similar sizes, yes(though it's highly unlikely that any real gun is that small), but the important question is: how dangerous would the gun in this case be?
The entire chamber section could fit on a nickel, if not a dime, with room to spare. Assume, for the sake of argument, that the outside appearance was just for show, that it did not have 6-chambers(or the zero that's most likely), and instead had one single section, filled entirely with gunpowder. Also assume, again for the sake of argument, that the chamber was as hollow as possible, and made of an extremely strong metal to contain the force of a (mini) explosion. Even then, the amount of gunpowder you'd be talking about would be no more than a miniscule pinch, barely enough to cause a small puff of smoke, and certainly not enough to propel something fast enough to be dangerous.
A gorram fork, which the airline itself provides, would present more of a threat than this prop 'gun', even assuming the worst, so to treat it as though it was no different than a full-sized revolver is an extreme over-reaction.