Triggered: Stories to make you mad.

Started by dadudemon922 pages
Originally posted by Surtur
Captain Planet gave me the power of heart and f*ck you for thinking I should not use it!

Yeah, but why you gotta touch people's hearts from their butthole, man? Feels like...it's not necessary. 🙁

heart rhymes with fart and farts come out of butts

Originally posted by Surtur
heart rhymes with fart and farts come out of butts

Makes sense. It is part of your religion.

Want to be legit triggered?

https://www.wkrg.com/top-stories/news-5-investigates-disturbing-video-shows-daphne-assisted-living-home-employee-poking-mocking-dead-womans-body/

"Disturbing video shows Daphne assisted living home employee poking, mocking dead woman’s body"

Now this is something that "all sides" can unite and agree on: this lady is a giant piece of shit and her behavior is absolutely disgusting.

Holy shit, 17 year old defending his place of business shot and killed 2 AntiFa members and injured a 3rd, in self-defense.

YouTube video

You don't see anyone killed but it DOES contain a very graphic "agonized breathing"* segment for one of the people who eventually die.

*Usually the last breathing someone does before dying.

This is the Civil War II I keep talking about. It's happening and escalating.

He has skills. The fact that he wasn’t just spray and pray, but taking well calculated shot, was impressive.

On another note, I don’t feel sorry the one’s that got shot, but I do feel sympathy for the family that are left behind.

Originally posted by SquallX
He has skills. The fact that he wasn’t just spray and pray, but taking well calculated shot, was impressive.

On another note, I don’t feel sorry the one’s that got shot, but I do feel sympathy for the family that are left behind.

On another note, you have to be 18 to open cary in their state. He's already being charged with First Degree Murder but those charges will not stick. But an unlawful open carry WILL stick. In the US, ignorance of the law won't save you (mens rea) since we charge based on actus reus.

You act like he works there but he's from Illinois. He crossed state lines to go defend businesses.

I told you people were becoming vigilantes.

Lol. If anyone needs a laugh just watch this trailer from Showtime's "The Comey Rule".

I have to point out: this is not a parody. This is not an SNL skit. This is a real thing they did. The actors truly read this scrip and decided it was a good idea.

YouTube video

Yikes, this makes Oliver Stone's JFK look historically accurate in comparison.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Holy shit, 17 year old defending his place of business shot and killed 2 AntiFa members and injured a 3rd, in self-defense.

YouTube video

You don't see anyone killed but it DOES contain a very graphic "agonized breathing"* segment for one of the people who eventually die.

*Usually the last breathing someone does before dying.

This is the Civil War II I keep talking about. It's happening and escalating.

He was not defending his place of business.

Originally posted by truejedi
He was not defending his place of business.

Wrong.

From other videos he showed up in, getting interviewed prior to the shooting, he was being paid to do so making it his employer.

YouTube video

Originally posted by dadudemon
On another note, you have to be 18 to open cary in their state. He's already being charged with First Degree Murder but those charges will not stick. But an unlawful open carry WILL stick. In the US, ignorance of the law won't save you (mens rea) since we charge based on actus reus.

Pretty much. Details do matter though.

I always thought those zero tolerance sex laws didn't care if you were given a perfect fake I.D. and cover story, similar to how the US Government fell for Traci Lords when she convinced them she was an "adult entertainer" as she applied for a passport.

But it turns out details can make a difference. As they should... How is any law that only looks at an act, and ignores whether any reasonable person could have avoided such an act, not injust?

So apparently people at prison convert to Islam for "tangible benefits", like more time outside of their cell or better meals.

Why would that be? Why would any prison give preference based on religion?

Originally posted by Surtur
Lol. If anyone needs a laugh just watch this trailer from Showtime's "The Comey Rule".

I have to point out: this is not a parody. This is not an SNL skit. This is a real thing they did. The actors truly read this scrip and decided it was a good idea.

YouTube video

Yikes, this makes Oliver Stone's JFK look historically accurate in comparison.

Come on nobody watched this? It is hilarious. The part where Trump and Comey shake hands and Trump pulls him real close and says "lets take a picture".

The fact Mad Eye Moody is playing Trump? Lol. It even includes tearful reaction shots of people from election night after Trump won lol.

Guy on the phone: Russia, we think they're trying to sabotage Secretary Clinton's campaign

Jeff Daniels as Jim Comey: How?

Guy on the phone: Ever spend much time on Facebook?

^^^Actual dialogue lol. I wonder if it goes into more detail. "You should see this Bernie Sanders coloring book the Russians made".

I was impressed by Brendan Gleeson’s impression of Trump.

It's not the acting that is bad, it is the material lol.

Originally posted by cdtm
So apparently people at prison convert to Islam for "tangible benefits", like more time outside of their cell or better meals.

Why would that be? Why would any prison give preference based on religion?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7808783/Prisoners-converting-to-Islam-for-perks.html

Some prisoners believe they will receive "material benefits" such as more time out of their cell and better food during Ramadan if they become Muslim, the report by the Chief Inspector of Prisons said.

Among the reasons given by inmates for switching to Islam was the opportunity of "support and protection in a group with a powerful identity" and "perceptions of material advantages of identifying as Muslim".

Some criminals – known as "convenience Muslims" – adopt the religion in order to get benefits available only to Muslims according to Dame Anne Owers.

Her report, entitled Muslim Prisoners' Experiences, also suggests Muslim prisoners are being driven to extremism because they are all treated as potential radicals while in jail.

The treatment of Muslim inmates by the Prison Service risks a "self-fulfilling prophecy" of leaving them alienated and disaffected, Dame Owers warned.

She said the "blanket security-led" approach, which focuses only on tackling Muslim extremism and not individual or faith needs, means the prisoners are more likely to reoffend or embrace extremism once back in the community.

However, prison staff fear some prisoners are being forced to convert to Islam by radical inmates while other Muslims are being pressured to adopt a more extreme version of the faith, the report revealed.

The thematic report examined the experiences of Muslims while in jail and found 30 per cent of 164 Muslim interviewed had converted while inside.

Dame Anne said there are two separate approaches to managing the needs of Muslims in prison, one is to look at their diversity, particular needs and potential discrimination while the other "focuses solely on Muslims as potential or actual extremists".

She said: "At present, the latter approach appears to be better resourced, better understood and more prevalent.

“It would be naive to deny that there are, within the prison population, Muslims who hold radical extremist views, or who may be attracted to them for a variety of reasons.

"But that does not argue for a blanket security-led approach to Muslim prisoners in general. The National Offender Management Service must develop a strategy, with support and training, for effective staff engagement with Muslims as individual prisoners with specific risks and needs, rather than as part of a separate and troubling group.

“Without that, there is a real risk of a self-fulfilling prophecy: that the prison experience will create or entrench alienation and disaffection, so that prisons release into the community young men who are more likely to offend, or even embrace extremism.”

The report found: "Staff at one high security prison believed that some Muslim gangs put pressure on non-Muslims to convert and on Muslims to conform to a strict and extreme interpretation of Islam."

It said staff "appeared reluctant" to challenge inappropriate behaviour leaving a perception that Muslim prisoners "policed themselves".

There were similar concerns of potentially pressured conversions in some young offenders institutions.

However, the report said it found no evidence to back up any of the claims of forced conversions.

The report also found an over-representation of black prisoners turning to Islam – 65 per cent of those interviewed.

It found no reason for the high levels but said some prisoners said it was "causing unease among staff already struggling to understand and respond to extremism".

Law and Order
News »
Politics »
UK News »
Tom Whitehead »
In Law And Order
Members of the emergency services take part in Operation Strong Tower, a major counter-terrorism exercise where they respond to a mock terrorist firearms attack at Aldwych Station in London
Operation Strong Tower
the hole the robbers drilled through the concrete vault.
Hatton Garden heist

Originally posted by cdtm
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/7808783/Prisoners-converting-to-Islam-for-perks.html

Bit of a mixed message here.

So prisons discriminate against Muslims, radicalising them. Yet also give special benefits during religious holidays?

In terms of the latter, I've heard the same for Jewish prisoners getting a nice dinner with macaroons and everything, and many "self declaring" as jewish just to enjoy those benefits.

I'm interested in the "why's", though. The Rabbi who wrote the piece didn't really know, and chalked it up to a good lobby.

Personally, I think there's always shady dealings behinds the scenes, any time one group enjoys benefits over other groups.

Originally posted by cdtm
But it turns out details can make a difference. As they should... How is any law that only looks at an act, and ignores whether any reasonable person could have avoided such an act, not injust?

In the US, that's how our CJS works: actus reas, NOT mens rea.