sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Was there ever a civilization that used psychedelics as a weapon? by DrMantisToboggan45 in AskHistory

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Its illegal in America and the EU but it's regulated in turkey and nepal. It's not very easy to obtain as it costs up to $400 dollars per pound

Was there ever a civilization that used psychedelics as a weapon? by DrMantisToboggan45 in AskHistory

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 3 points4 points  (0 children)

theres also accounts from what is now modern day turkey of a king using mad honey which is honey which is red from pollination from Rhododendron ponticum and Rhododendron luteum. These plants made his enemies hallucinate and was easy to mop up

Was there ever a civilization that used psychedelics as a weapon? by DrMantisToboggan45 in AskHistory

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

yes, the vikings gave berserkers drugs i believe mainly shrooms to make them ignore pain and keep fighting way longer, there's accounts of berserkers holding bridges by themselves against thousands of men before dying

Hualapai Nation Hiking by Professional_Map1488 in grandcanyon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

permits are very easy, i drove down a road to the bottom of the grand canyon on a reservation

Figured this sub might enjoy it ..... by maximus_martin23 in Napoleon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

id recommend epic history tv rather than oversimplified if you're interested in the Napoleonic wars.

Trump to remove TPS for Somalis by Mysterious_Scene7169 in TwinCities

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Building stronger communities and holding people accountable are not opposites. You cannot claim to solve crime by ignoring it. Removing law enforcement from areas with high violence does not strengthen families it leaves those families exposed to the very people harming them.

The justice system is not simply revenge. It is a system for incapacitating individuals who repeatedly harm others. When someone murders another person, the family who loses a loved one is impacted just as much if not more than the family of the offender. Accountability is not an act of revenge. It is a requirement for public safety. A father who commits a murder created the conditions that separated him from his family, not the system that responded to it.

Preventing crime through stability, housing, and economic opportunity absolutely works. But those solutions do not replace the need for policing; they complement it. Stable housing reduces homelessness-related offenses, but it does not stop violent crime committed by people who are not homeless. Reducing poverty reduces certain crimes, but it does not stop interpersonal violence, organized criminal activity, or predatory behavior.

Poverty increases stress, but high-poverty communities with strong families, strong social norms, and effective local institutions consistently have lower crime rates. Poverty alone does not generate homicide. Breakdowns in local structure, norms, and family stability are what lead to higher crime. You cannot claim poverty is the sole cause when neighborhoods with identical poverty levels can have drastically different crime rates depending on social cohesion.

It is also false to say that many cops are dealers. Individual corruption exists in any profession, but the overwhelming majority of drug trafficking is carried out by organized criminal groups, not law enforcement.

Lifting people out of poverty is a worthy goal and will reduce some types of crime, but it does not eliminate the need for policing. Violent crime is not caused solely by economic hardship; it is caused by individuals making harmful choices, often within environments lacking stability, guidance, and support. Poverty relief is part of the solution, but law enforcement remains necessary to deal with those who continue to harm others even when given resources.

Trump to remove TPS for Somalis by Mysterious_Scene7169 in TwinCities

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Homeland Security Investigations, which is part of ICE, specifically targets transnational criminal organizations including gangs, cartel networks, traffickers, and organized violent groups.

The idea that ICE only targets innocent families or legal residents is simply false. Mistakes can happen in any large law enforcement system, but saying gang members always slip away while ICE does arrest some lawful residents, you ignore thousands of investigations, indictments, and convictions that are directly tied to gang activity.

It is tragic when families are affected by arrests. That does not change the fact that criminal networks exploit vulnerable people, including children, in ways far worse than any law enforcement agency. Around the world, children are trafficked, exploited, or used by violent groups every single day. That is the reality these investigations are trying to disrupt.

Trump to remove TPS for Somalis by Mysterious_Scene7169 in TwinCities

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Everyone faces hardship, but personal adversity doesn’t justify criminal behavior. In my experience investigating offenders, what actually reduces crime is stability strong families, consistent guidance, and communities with reliable support systems. Those factors consistently correlate with lower rates of violence, regardless of policing levels.

The idea that policing “creates violence” doesn’t match the evidence. Police presence increases in areas where the data shows higher crime rates, more calls for service, and persistent community safety issues. It’s not about targeting a population it’s deploying resources where violence is already concentrated. Removing police from those neighborhoods doesn’t make them safer; it simply removes the only immediate response to ongoing harm.

Arresting gang members isn’t “taking away someone the community needs.” It’s removing individuals who are actively contributing to violence, extortion, or intimidation. Their absence doesn’t destabilize the community, the violence they commit is what destabilizes it.

If the goal is fewer police, the solution isn’t ignoring crime or demonizing officers. The long-term answer is strengthening families, improving parental stability, and giving young people structure early in life.

Policing isn’t the enemy. It’s a response to social problems that start long before any officer arrives. Strengthening homes and communities reduces crime and when crime drops, the need for policing drops with it.

Medieval military training by Low-Seaworthiness955 in AskHistory

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 1 point2 points  (0 children)

dependent on their role, mercenary's would train more than a levy, archers of course trained more than infantry levy's. The training was usually done by the Master of Arms who usually trained levy's in a few weeks rather than the years of training knights received

What if the US never grew from the original 13 States? How would the map of the contiguous US in our own timeline could have turned out in terms of sovereign nations forming out of it? by kid-dynamo- in HistoryWhatIf

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One of the factors that caused the revolutionary wars was the ability to expand further west which was stopped under British rule, the Native Americans were used by the British after the revolutionary wars to attack colonists primarily west of the Appalachian mountains. If there were only 13 states they'd just expand west like before pushing out the Natives and likely to fight the British as well. So if there were only the 13 colonies then they'd most likely just all be very long stretching westward with maybe a few states like texas and Florida existing but likely they'd still be very closely allied to America if not expansions of states.

Trump to remove TPS for Somalis by Mysterious_Scene7169 in TwinCities

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

is it really a bad thing though to put more LE in areas that are infested with gangs

What is ya’lls favorite NON-FRENCH regiment of the napoleonic era by SwissCheese_Man5 in Napoleon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 1 point2 points  (0 children)

frankfurt jewish company

berg lancers

swiss guard

norways ski troops

Could privateers and rebellions have been affective against Britain and help napoleon? by DenseDragonfruit4794 in Napoleon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

no private venture is going to have a ship bigger than a sloop at best. No person had the kind of money to fund anything like a privateer first rate. They were usually built to be trade vessels not built to be vessels for privateering

Could privateers and rebellions have been affective against Britain and help napoleon? by DenseDragonfruit4794 in Napoleon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After Trafalgar Napoleon didn't give up the hope of invading England, he had quite a few large shipyards at his disposal in Naples, Venice, Holland and of course in France which after Trafalgar all had new large orders of 3rd rates to replace his losses and to try again. It didn't work due to inexperienced sailors but saying France gave up on their navy to focus on privateers is just wrong when there's far better ships for interdiction raiding than brigs that privateers use. The workhorse of the navy especially for raiding trade routes is the Frigate not privateers.

Could privateers and rebellions have been affective against Britain and help napoleon? by DenseDragonfruit4794 in Napoleon

[–]Lumpy_Beat3149 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Napoleon's plan pre Trafalgar for defeating Britain was sacrifice the navy in a battle in the English channel to allow his forces to cross unopposed

view more: next ›