Vanilla 1.1.9 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2014
     
    There +is+ justice after all.
    • CommentAuthorthehard
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2014 edited
     
    In case you wonder what my opinion is on this subject as a Spaniard, I'm always on the bulls' side.

    I found bullfighting disgusting the first time I saw them, when I was a kid, and still do.

    Yet, I find some of the points made by the people who hate bullfighting are (bull)shit, but that's probably another story.

    (edited for readability)
  1.  
    I agree with both of you. Manhood rituals will have to find other methods. I recommend the bullet ant cuff.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMay 21st 2014
     
    Took me a minute there. Surely you mean "Buller ant". I met someone who was bitten by one last month. She said it hurt for a while. After a bit she stopped wanting to cut her leg off.
  2.  
    The pain caused by this insect's sting is purported to be greater than that of any other hymenopteran, and is ranked as the most painful according to the Schmidt sting pain index, given a "4+" rating, above the tarantula hawk wasp and, according to some victims, equal to being shot, hence the name of the insect. It is described as causing "waves of burning, throbbing, all-consuming pain that continues unabated for up to 24 hours".

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_ant

    Initiation rites

    The Satere-Mawe people of Brazil use intentional bullet ant stings as part of their initiation rites to become a warrior.[7] The ants are first rendered unconscious by submerging them in a natural sedative, and then hundreds of them are woven into a glove made of leaves (which resembles a large oven mitt), stingers facing inward. When the ants regain consciousness, a boy slips the glove onto his hand. The goal of this initiation rite is to keep the glove on for a full 10 minutes. When finished, the boy's hand and part of his arm are temporarily paralyzed because of the ant venom, and he may shake uncontrollably for days. The only "protection" provided is a coating of charcoal on the hands, supposedly to confuse the ants and inhibit their stinging. To fully complete the initiation, however, the boys must go through the ordeal a total of 20 times over the course of several months or even years. [
    • CommentAuthortinker
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2014
     
    This is what happens to people who don't waste their time on the interwebs.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMay 22nd 2014 edited
     
    I think the person I was talking to was bit by one of the Myrmecia, not the Nicaraguan bullet ant.
    • CommentAuthorAsterix
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2018 edited
     
    Strange as it may seem, Washington is the first (and thus far, only) state with comprehensive rules against bias in jury selection:

    https://www.colorlines.com/articles/washington-first-state-adopt-comprehensive-anti-bias-rule-jury-selection

    I'll be dead by the time Alabama enacts the same.
  3.  
    Good ole boys never die.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeApr 27th 2018
     
    We have the same problem here, and a similar solution is being enacted.
    • CommentAuthorAsterix
    • CommentTimeMay 3rd 2018 edited
     
    SA Mining companies reach $400M settlement with miner over silicosis

    Cheap. One only has to ask how many upper-level executives of these companies have contracted silicosis.

    Well, the victims are poorly-paid blacks, so no matter.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24397231
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeFeb 2nd 2019 edited
     
    Guantanamo, 18 years after...

    They were first charged in 2008 and the military commission proceedings began in 2012. The accused are growing old, some of the witnesses have died and the trial is still a year off, at least...


    ...there are still 40 prisoners left. Only 12 of those have been charged, or soon will be. The rest are stuck in indefinite detention, including five who have been formally cleared but have not been released.


    Ref.
    • CommentAuthorAsterix
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019 edited
     
    Kentucky judge denies DNA testing of executed man

    "We only honor DNA testing requests from the convicted; but we killed him, so too bad."

    Not even poetic.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeNov 19th 2019 edited
     
    Here's a question for our legal minds.

    Some are trying to maintain that the President of the USA cannot commit a crime while in office. I suppose there would be two interpretations - either no act of a president is criminal, or no act of a president can be punished while he is in office.

    If the first interpretation holds, then would it not be true that no President of the USA could avoid responding to questions about his conduct on the grounds of the 5th Amendment of the US constitution, since no act of his could be held to be criminal? Therefore he would have to answer under oath.

    If the second interpretation holds, is that not a situation resembling ex post facto legislation? I believe it has been held that some regulations can be applied retroactively like that, but criminal law?

    Curious layminds want to know...
    •  
      CommentAuthoralsetalokin
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2019 edited
     
    Nixon famously said "If the President does it, it's not illegal" or something similar.

    But it's clear, I think, that a President can indeed commit crimes while in office. But the JD has opined that a POTUS cannot be _prosecuted_ (nor indicted, maybe even cannot be investigated if you're Trump) while in office. The POTUS can be impeached for certain crimes and removed from office if convicted, and _then_ it may be criminally prosecuted for crimes committed while in office as long as the statutory time limits have not been exceeded. There is some talk about re-writing the SoL to start the clock when the POTUS leaves office rather than when the alleged crime was allegedly committed, to get around a 2-termer running out the SoL for some crime while actually in office. Also, were it not for that JD opinion, an indictment could be filed before the SoL time limit even while POTUS holds the office, for prosecution after out of office.

    So it's not expostfacto, since the law existed at the time the crime was committed, it is just that indictment/prosecution etc has to respect the Statutes of Limitations.
    •  
      CommentAuthoroak
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2019
     
    What Al said.

    As for the first interpretation, I don't think anyone really believes that, except perhaps people like Trump and Attorney General William Barr. Perhaps Congress could compel the president's testimony in an impeachment hearing by granting immunity from future criminal prosecution (but not immunity from removal by impeachment), but it's also possible that a court would say the president cannot be compelled to testify even in an impeachment proceeding, because it would interfere with his so very important presidential duties.
    • CommentAuthorAsterix
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2019 edited
     
    Shrug. The battle is most likely lost--the crooks will mount vast media campaigns to sway the population their way.

    Until we enact severe penalties for lying by public officials and media personalities, things will just keep circling the drain.

    Of course, one point of view is that the First Amendment protects even the most extreme mendacity.
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2019
     
    I am trying to imagine Wee Donald testifying before the House Committee and pleading his fifth amendment rights. I think I'd laugh myself sick.
    •  
      CommentAuthoraber0der
    • CommentTimeNov 20th 2019
     
    Prof. Dr. Honigtau Bunsenbrenner testifies.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0enYKXuedsQ
    •  
      CommentAuthorAngus
    • CommentTimeMar 27th 2020