WELCOME TO RIVER DAVES PLACE

Bringing some Facebook to Rdp

LowRiver2

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 20, 2007
Messages
5,179
Reaction score
5,166
Sooo, what if you've been on the other side of the officer beat down...


...and still feel police should be able to use MORE force?
Asking for a friend.
This is in regards to overcoming resistance of criminals who I’m trying to arrest.
Taking away the carotid neck restraint means now I do a contact head shot with my back up gun instead of putting a violent arrestee into submission to live another day.
There are courts to deal with excessive force.
Age of body cams , what happened to you has a 80% or better chance of not happening (wrong doing) because it’s recorded.
LAPD Recruits carry empty body cams and have to tap them on during every contact / scenario in training: muscle memory
 

monkeyswrench

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2018
Messages
7,656
Reaction score
13,192
This is in regards to overcoming resistance of criminals who I’m trying to arrest.
Taking away the carotid neck restraint means now I do a contact head shot with my back up gun instead of putting a violent arrestee into submission to live another day.
There are courts to deal with excessive force.
Age of body cams , what happened to you has a 80% or better chance of not happening (wrong doing) because it’s recorded.
LAPD Recruits carry empty body cams and have to tap them on during every contact / scenario in training: muscle memory
Nope, as I've lived a couple more decades, it was not any wrong doing by LEO. I was a knucklehead, I got what was coming to me. I kind of look at it that way, probably 90%+ of incidents requiring use of force were justified at the time. The other 10%...probably still got what's coming, just not at that time. Everybody wants to go home. If a criminal refuses to take the detour to jail, it's not good odds for them. The world needs to take responsibility for their actions.

And yes, I never thought I'd be one backing law and order. I like what I've done, and where I have come to. Society needs laws to be followed, so long as those laws are not infringing on Civil Rights.
 

JUSTWANNARACE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2018
Messages
2,460
Reaction score
5,634
Nope, as I've lived a couple more decades, it was not any wrong doing by LEO. I was a knucklehead, I got what was coming to me. I kind of look at it that way, probably 90%+ of incidents requiring use of force were justified at the time. The other 10%...probably still got what's coming, just not at that time. Everybody wants to go home. If a criminal refuses to take the detour to jail, it's not good odds for them. The world needs to take responsibility for their actions.

And yes, I never thought I'd be one backing law and order. I like what I've done, and where I have come to. Society needs laws to be followed, so long as those laws are not infringing on Civil Rights.
This is the problem right now! All of the ones protesting are the age we where when we did dumb shit!! They have yet to reach that "path of life" stage, to make the decision to stay on that path, or become and adult! The majority are the "rebellious" age when we thought we knew everything and authority was bad..

I had a long conversation at the bar the other night with a 23yr old guy, (had a mohawk and shit, moved here from san Diego) that was marching with the the BLM.. it's a long story, but after a 2hr debate, while drinking beer, I can guarantee he will not join that protest again.. we has a very civil debate, he was going off feeling not facts.. he honestly had no clue about the "facts".. and everytime he would bring up his "point" I would ask him to show me proof.. lol.. it was kind of funny, it was like a 2hr session of braking the kid down.. but he listened, and relized, the movement he was protesting for was not what he stood for.. the guy was super cool, and when I left, he stopped me, shook my hand. All the kids he was with where staring at me. He said "I explained to them some of what we talked about" and now the are questioning it also(it was a group of about 8 or so, colored hair, mohawks, gender neutral) "I want to think you for the talk"!

Things never got heated, it was a complete civil conversation between both of us.. it was kind of cool!!

And I honestly think he will spread to others
 

Demoman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2007
Messages
675
Reaction score
749
This is the problem right now! All of the ones protesting are the age we where when we did dumb shit!! They have yet to reach that "path of life" stage, to make the decision to stay on that path, or become and adult! The majority are the "rebellious" age when we thought we knew everything and authority was bad..

I had a long conversation at the bar the other night with a 23yr old guy, (had a mohawk and shit, moved here from san Diego) that was marching with the the BLM.. it's a long story, but after a 2hr debate, while drinking beer, I can guarantee he will not join that protest again.. we has a very civil debate, he was going off feeling not facts.. he honestly had no clue about the "facts".. and everytime he would bring up his "point" I would ask him to show me proof.. lol.. it was kind of funny, it was like a 2hr session of braking the kid down.. but he listened, and relized, the movement he was protesting for was not what he stood for.. the guy was super cool, and when I left, he stopped me, shook my hand. All the kids he was with where staring at me. He said "I explained to them some of what we talked about" and now the are questioning it also(it was a group of about 8 or so, colored hair, mohawks, gender neutral) "I want to think you for the talk"!

Things never got heated, it was a complete civil conversation between both of us.. it was kind of cool!!

And I honestly think he will spread to others
Good on you for taking the time to educate the kid. I feel it is so important for us to inform and deprogram as many young people as possible. There are so many misguided youngsters out there that need to be shown the facts. Not all of them will listen but it is important that we reach the ones who will.
 

t&y

t&y
Joined
Jan 9, 2010
Messages
10,984
Reaction score
12,717
Where are the stats on this? LOL I'm sure there's a really well done study behind it :rolleyes:
It was in my doctors office.
I'm not surprised by those "stats". It's kind of common sense that you can prevent the transmission by not touching your face which is really what that mask is doing. I'm not talking about someone who is infected walking up and coughing at you through a mask, just normal breathing walking around in public.
 

FUN4ME

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 27, 2012
Messages
217
Reaction score
220
Disclaimer: I am the nephew of Fun4Me with a degree in human biology and a specialty in molecular biology (not an english major). I hate incomplete information and there is so much of it going around right now, I just want to stop any misinterpretation. (Plus who doesn't love taking the fun out of meme's). I am 100% in agreement that wearing a mask should be a requirement for all individuals (excluding those with valid medical reasons verified by a licenced physician). I won't leave the house without one and I keep my distance from anyone who is not wearing a mask. All that being said, here is more accurate information.


Percentages are always misleading without a baseline. What is the percentage based on? What is 100%? 70% of what? 5% of what? 1.5% of what? What they are trying to explain is the communicability of the virus (ability of the virus to spread). However, in order to do that, they would need to explain how communicability is calulated which is a more complex endeavor. So for simplicity sake, here is what the chart should say still ignoring the calculation.

The percentages included are showing a reduction in the ability to pass on the virus. The photo should be updated to include one more option as well as explain the likelihood of transmission. The following ASSUMES you will get the virus if exposed which is UNTRUE but still "makes maths" easier.


COVID-19 Carrier with no mask + exposed individual with no mask = a contagion probability of 100% reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with no mask + exposed individual with mask = 30% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 70% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with mask + exposed individual with no mask = 95% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 5% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with mask + exposed individual with mask = 98.5% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 1.5% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.

I nearly did the math for Covid-19 transmission rate but one, that would change based upon all of these situations, two, I don't have time for that and three, that belongs on r/theydidthemath.

-Bubba
 

Flying_Lavey

Dreaming of the lake
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
15,377
Reaction score
9,426
Disclaimer: I am the nephew of Fun4Me with a degree in human biology and a specialty in molecular biology (not an english major). I hate incomplete information and there is so much of it going around right now, I just want to stop any misinterpretation. (Plus who doesn't love taking the fun out of meme's). I am 100% in agreement that wearing a mask should be a requirement for all individuals (excluding those with valid medical reasons verified by a licenced physician). I won't leave the house without one and I keep my distance from anyone who is not wearing a mask. All that being said, here is more accurate information.


Percentages are always misleading without a baseline. What is the percentage based on? What is 100%? 70% of what? 5% of what? 1.5% of what? What they are trying to explain is the communicability of the virus (ability of the virus to spread). However, in order to do that, they would need to explain how communicability is calulated which is a more complex endeavor. So for simplicity sake, here is what the chart should say still ignoring the calculation.

The percentages included are showing a reduction in the ability to pass on the virus. The photo should be updated to include one more option as well as explain the likelihood of transmission. The following ASSUMES you will get the virus if exposed which is UNTRUE but still "makes maths" easier.


COVID-19 Carrier with no mask + exposed individual with no mask = a contagion probability of 100% reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with no mask + exposed individual with mask = 30% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 70% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with mask + exposed individual with no mask = 95% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 5% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.
COVID-19 Carrier with mask + exposed individual with mask = 98.5% reduction in ability for communication to happen or 1.5% contagion probability reduced by current communicability rate.

I nearly did the math for Covid-19 transmission rate but one, that would change based upon all of these situations, two, I don't have time for that and three, that belongs on r/theydidthemath.

-Bubba
So what you're saying is everyone should wear a mask even if perfectly healthy just to increase the percentage reduction by 3.5% just to be exposed? Talk about giving up freedoms for splitting hairs
 

500bbc

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
20,234
Reaction score
23,629
This is the problem right now! All of the ones protesting are the age we where when we did dumb shit!! They have yet to reach that "path of life" stage, to make the decision to stay on that path, or become and adult! The majority are the "rebellious" age when we thought we knew everything and authority was bad..

I had a long conversation at the bar the other night with a 23yr old guy, (had a mohawk and shit, moved here from san Diego) that was marching with the the BLM.. it's a long story, but after a 2hr debate, while drinking beer, I can guarantee he will not join that protest again.. we has a very civil debate, he was going off feeling not facts.. he honestly had no clue about the "facts".. and everytime he would bring up his "point" I would ask him to show me proof.. lol.. it was kind of funny, it was like a 2hr session of braking the kid down.. but he listened, and relized, the movement he was protesting for was not what he stood for.. the guy was super cool, and when I left, he stopped me, shook my hand. All the kids he was with where staring at me. He said "I explained to them some of what we talked about" and now the are questioning it also(it was a group of about 8 or so, colored hair, mohawks, gender neutral) "I want to think you for the talk"!

Things never got heated, it was a complete civil conversation between both of us.. it was kind of cool!!

And I honestly think he will spread to others
Hopefully, I turned a neighbor and his infantile side kick when Bush was in office. Lasted a couple of years until he isolated himself again with the idiots, he's back to being a leftist tool. His side kick was arrested after moving to Arizona, passed out drunk in the gutter outside of a bar waiting for a friend to pick him up. Fought LE when they showed and punched their horse. It's very, very hard to get those brainless cucks to focus on fact.
 

Tank

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2008
Messages
12,708
Reaction score
17,743
I'm Gen X and this pic is pretty much 100% true. I remember driving across country in my dads 65 Dodge truck with over cab camper, 12 pack in between us on the vinyl bench, no AC, metal everywhere, no seat belts. My sister riding in the camper, no crawl space through, door barely closed back there but we knew we couldn't cross the "step down" portion of the camper and to stay away from the door. Driving in rural Americana, sharing a pack of beer nuts and when my dad would get to the last bit of his Coors Banquet beer (the part I now pitch out too lol) he'd hand it to me to finish. Fuckin' awesome!
 

DrunkenSailor

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2017
Messages
5,029
Reaction score
5,637
slightly incorrect. Although I wish it was right. Millennials are born from '81 to '96. and X'ers were born in '65 to '79
They are saying there is a micro generation called xennials from 80-83. Im gonna cling to that. I rode everything without a helmet. I rode in the back of pick up trucks. I had my first beer before i was 5. I aint no damn millennial.
 
Top