#9...

not subscribing to the left or the right, and taking in news from both sides of propaganda machines... it's interesting to watch those on the left be very ---- sure they are the informed ones and the others are the lemmings while those on the right are just as ---- sure they are the informed ones and the others are the lemmings.

If you are getting news from both sides of the aisle you are destined to fall into an echo chamber and just have your beliefs amplified with no grounds in reality anymore.

#2...

Are you sure you haven't heard of this one? I thought the same at first, but this from a while back and is the case where the Dad was convicted as well for gifting the kid the gun when he knew he was having issues.

The Dad's case has sort of eclipsed the sons and is why it might seem like a 'new' news story and that you missed it.

#16 JFC you are unhinged.

YOU'RE the reason we can't have nice things. YOU are the whackjob in the bodycam he was referring to. You're just mentally lost to realize it.

Definitely not a very forward looking list, Given the exodus of companies from their former homes and making investments in TX and TN... I'll be curious to see how they rate in a few years.

If the report I read is accurate, and she waited for him outside the Walmart and got out of her car to draw the weapon... it's going to be hard to argue self defense.

Intersting to see how this one plays out.

Getting rid of rent controlled apartments for one.

The rent is too damn high, and every proposal the democratic socialists are offering are only going to make it worse. I completely get voting for change, but be careful of which you wish for because you might just get it.

Being a Boston local I can attest that they have been fun guests and have made their mark on the city in a good way.

I have never said it was right. But until facts, actual facts, are known and not heresay and Ben Crump based... You don't know how it happened.

If it turns out the police were actually attempted to be run down, and they didn't know a kid was in the car then it is a horrible tragedy, but I won't blame the police.

If it turn out they knew there was kid, and weren't actually in danger, fry them.

If it turns out they knew there was a kid, but were actually in danger and felt the community are large was in danger... Then damn I wouldn't want to be in that position, and a cops job sucks... I'm not sure what I would say in that situation and the very very nitty gritty specifics will decide my opinion.

But no, I'm not going to damn the officers without the whole story, even if there are heart wrenching aspects of it on the surface.

And where the F did I race bait? This whole thread is race baiting, I haven't mentioned it once outside of quoting a poster or an article on it.

This whole thread is race baiting in the opposite direction and that's where this whole site is, Black person involve? Cops are wrong!! You're so race obsessed you lose all reason.

Found a few news articles with a bit more information, only one mentions that the mother didn't shoplift. She however was not the driver. If I extrapolate out with the best of intentions given, it sounds like she was possibly unknowingly with someone who caused the situation and took them along on their attempt to leave. If this is true, it's even more tragic. The body cam will be telling.

Based on a lot of reactions here though, you have what you need. A minority involved in an incident so you immediately jump to the police are wrong.

Since you all seem to have more information beyond the initial media bulletin; where are you seeing this?

You're misunderstanding my intent.

The question above asked why would they fire at a fleeing car. If the car were being used as a weapon against them it would answer why, the question if that is a reasonable response would still be open.

Every inference beyond that is outside my intent. I'm not saying firing was right or wrong, I'm certainly not justifying the death of an infant with it. Merely answering the why would they fire. If it read that they emptied their clips into the car as it pulled away, I wouldn't have posted it at all as it wouldn't answer anything about why, and on the surface without further information would certainly not be justifiable.

"You're justifying the cops shooting an infant."

where did I justify anything?

and yes, I'll wait for more of the story beyond the briefing before deciding if the shooting were justified. The shooting at the vehicle and not the infant to clarify, that is a horrible result of all this. It will be a HIGH bar for me think the cops were justified here. But at the moment there are no facts other than the surface level version of the incident. Unless more have come out, and I haven't seen them yet.

You're chomping at the bit for me to defend the cops on your assumption they came in itching to shoot. I won't defend that. We don't know yet if that was what happened though. The whole story will come out though, and I'll react fully then.

I swear to god you read looking for the one clip to latch on the rail against.

The question was raised above "why fire at the fleeing car?", and a POSSIBLE answer was in the briefing AND I added IF ACCURATE.

You already have this entire incident in your head, how it happened, who was wrong, and why. When in reality you have NO facts to go on. You also then extrapolate out my supposed position on this incident and ALL police related incidents based on me posting a simple fact answering a question above.

You live in a miserable world of your own imagination, have fun there.

So the link connects to a Miss. Dept of Public Safety bulletin which gives a brief overview of the event, and that an investigation is underway.

In the bulletin in infers the vehicle may have been used as a weapon by driving at the police. Which answers why they would have fired at the car if this is accurate.

Until actual details are released, there seems to be a quick jump to assign motives to the office based solely on the race of the suspects. I'll wait for actual facts.

Data centers and AI centric data centers are not the same thing clown. I haven't looked at your links yet though, perhaps they account for this, but I'll be surprised if these aren't broad numbers only. Being a leader in the internet space it's not a surprise to me that we have more than others, but that doesn't mean they are designed for the coming changes.

And it's not fear mongering if it's not an assessment of reality. I'm not calling anyone a bad guy here, merely that the global economy is a race to stay in the lead and that looking and planning ahead has to be done. Looking at what your competitors are doing and making sure you are well positioned is only smart too. Planning and assessing isn't fear mongering.

Beyond datacenters we have to be looking at innovation in this space as well, something that other countries are doing well with, and for us to be aware of.

What's your question Danni? Are you proposing the Trump is only interested in the expansion of Data Center only for the purpose of domestic surveillance?

If so HE may be looking to do that. BUT. The internet was a paradigm shift in how the world functions, and AI is the next one. Any country that falls behind in the AI race WILL be left behind. No matter what Trumps reason is, there are a multitude of reasons why the US HAS to be investing heavily into these data centers right now. China is certainly going all in as well as others, we have to be too.

#53 of course it did. It was a horrible look, weakened whomever was the eventual winner as President, and on and on...

You can't say the same about LA? Or is it defend defend defend, because it's viewed as your teams? We only get stronger when we acknowledge our weaknesses and adapt.

#32

Excellent point Snoofy, especially when combined with Clown's insightful #31.

Los Angeles is a big city, but it's not that big. Entire countries have elections and counted votes much faster than this. If you don't want the possibility of looking fraudulent, have a better system since there are obviously better ways to do it than this.

it's not even the volume of the ads so much, but the intrusiveness of them(to me at least)... especially that slow moving drop down and retract one. That one has me move onto other things more than anything else.

The right cut too arbitrarily and the left hasn't seen a social issue they won't throw money at. There needs to be a mid-ground.

Snoofy never considers that it's not only that some people find the Rights message appealing it's that a lot find the far lefts message repellant. Combine with the far left eating it's own if they don't fall in line, people silently move right.

Are those not under the properly umbrella?

Given the advent of all I said above, One poster here definitely will be proven right... it's time to take a hard look at Universal Basic Income. The only alternative is that like the Blacksmith example... If you look at the jobs that existed then vs the jobs that exist now the vast majority did not exist back then. The jobs of tomorrow, probably don't exist today.