Does anyone remember the phone charms that would flash if your phone was ringing?
I'd like a phone charm that flashed on detection of radio output.
Amusingly, Robocop 2014 features a moment where a bad-guy is located by an unprotected phone in use (via 3rd party doctrine or dubious search) but we're supposed to cheer it on because Alex Murphy is good and the phone is owned by the henchman of an arms dealer.
People don't vote according to their best interests, because they often don't even know what their best interests are.
And people will often vote out of a sense loyalty (say, based on how their family or minister or friends vote) rather than who will act according to their own needs.
And people will often vote based on vanity attributes (the better-looking or easier name to pronounce) or rumors (Obama is a Kenyan Islamic terrorist) than what their own candidate will do for them.
And people will fixate on emotionally charged issues that have little effect (Abortion, Terrorism, Rampage Killers, Obamacare Death Panels) rather than matters that are actually killing them (lead in the water, disappearing jobs, failing medical access, law enforcement overreach).
And our candidates have no impetus to act on their own platform once in office, case in point George W. Bush who went from a compassionate conservative to a hard-line neo-con within hours of his inauguration, or Obama who went from Mr. Hope and Change to Opacity and Status Quo and the CIA Drone Strike program massacring civilians continuously (Don't look at the bodies too closely) in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
And people are sometimes circumvented entirely since their states have been gerrymandered to Hell, the control of which is securely in the hands of the incumbent parties.
You obviously have different standards than I do for what counts as a logical creature. We still pretend we are capable of logical thought continuously, when in reality even our scientists and engineers have to use processes to disengage emotional biases and can still only logic in short bursts. (It's why we do math on paper, so that we can check to see how each logical conclusion follows directly from the last.) The reason that companies use dissuasive customer service techniques and lengthy, dry, obtuse contracts is that they work in ensnaring the customer into committing more than he can rationalize. We're not only biased, but we live in a society that actively uses those biases to exploit us.
And one of the theaters in which the war of exploiting the people is waged is our election system.
I don't think they should just give the drugs, or the vehicle used to transport them back.. full fucking stop.
I do. The state is way out of jurisdiction once they have conducted an illegal search, and -- how shall we say it: it imposes a substantial social cost for there to be any impetus for the police to engage in unreasonable search and seizure, since the temptation to do so is so great on its own. The police are not even trustworthy holding contraband in their evidence lockers or destroying it.
Once we allow law enforcement to gain actually profit from overreach, they're going to do so. Excessively. There are number historic examples of how this goes down.
No, the proper order in this case is for the police to return to him his belongings (including any contraband) in recognition that the state and its agents are not above law either.
The suspect should be compensated for time lost due to the police overreach and then let to go about his business
We need to stop thinking of the police as a caste with a moral high ground over the rest of us. Indeed, if anything they have clearly proven that human beings are incapable of holding that elevated level of power without corruption and indulgence. They just aren't.
The US police is supposed to operate under the principles of policing by Sir Robert Peel (at least they still teach Peelian Principles in cop school and say these are our foundational principles. The police is the people. The people are the police. It's still supposed to be that way. It's not.
Rather, our law enforcement agents are so removed from common civilians now that they regard common civilians as the enemy, they defend their own corruption openly and plainly. They prey commonly on innocent civilians as highwaymen and brigands. They act as nothing more than yet another street gang, merely one backed with state funding.
I remember the position of Jews as moneylenders and traders in the middle ages in response to their ostracization from common trades. There just seems to be a time-gap between the era the Jewish moneylender and modern antisemitism, especially since the Swiss and Italian banking systems had been established throughout Europe since the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
Ick! From the perspective of an outsider, that parable smacks of advocating of genocide.
weeds are simply plants you don't want growing in your garden. Most of the time, they're regarded as weeds because they choke out product plants (though numerous kinds are symbiotic or provide produce of their own).
Generally one doesn't need an enemy to have their fields weeded. Flora tends to migrate and conquer territory on its own.
This has happened in other companies and agencies.
A friend of mine in the 90s speaks to me of how he lost his mind running a chemical plant in the 80s and stopped going to work.
They mailed him his salary for an entire year before asking him where he went and could he please go back to work. As the second year approached, they warned him that if he wouldn't go back to work (he already said he wouldn't) that they'd stop paying his salary at the end of the second year (not sooner).
What happened is never a good representation of what should have happened according to Catholic (or any) doctrine. Augustine of Hippo prioritized the great commission over obedience, but the most right Christian thing for him to do (I think) was to sell all his belongings and walk the Earth preaching the message.
The problem with scripture that requires interpretation is that even nine experienced jurists are unable to come to consistent conclusions as to what a given passage means, hence the ~40,000 schisms of Christian faith.
(From a generic philosophical perspective, this is not a problem at all since we are meant to opine and occasionally disagree. No complex system of rules can exist without paradox. The problem comes when we decide These rules are sacred! but we can't agree on what the rules mean. Wars have dragged on and on triggered by such disagreements.)
Regardless, there's a lot of Divine Right of Kings in the New Testament, and according to Romans 13, the Colonists were probably wrong to declare independence in the first place and rebel, but George and parliament were wrong to treat the colonies like crap as well.
Christian society depends a heck of a lot on everyone playing along.
Some kinds of Satanism involve sacrifice in effigy, often the pope of the RCC, though there are some that like virgin women. (Or they'll do a non-killing pageant of a virgin sacrifice. It's considered a place of honor to be the one sacrificed.)
Santeria features the sacrifice of small animals, typically chickens. Several counties actually have special dispensation rules for the unregulated slaughter of chickens or game in municipal areas when done for religious purposes. And they'll cook and eat the hapless bird afterwords.
The neat thing about a sacrifice is that it creates an event. In ancient times, a sacrifice could be very powerful by which executions were commuted, debtors were forgiven and shunned were welcomed back into the community, their misdeeds passed on to the offering.
Without these events, our modern religions have had to create alternative rights...or, as in post-reformation western society, they have forgotten what they were about.
I'm also not saying things were better in the good old days, but that some good ideas were disrupted and never recovered.