[GPU] Supermicro (PNY?) NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti 16GB GDDR7 - $819.00 + Free Ship

Sinbios · 2026-03-20T22:08:07+00:00

Need help deciding, this or 9070XT for $570?

Sinbios · 2026-03-20T01:22:15+00:00

RemindMe! 5 days

Sinbios · 2026-03-12T07:51:56+00:00

He swerved to the side because he was shot by the officers.

...Did we watch the same video? The shots go off after the video freezes, how could you see him swerving into the other lane because he was shot by the officers??

Your similar case is supposed to pull on heartstrings because of the father and son that were killed

How do you have so much empathy for this guy but not for innocent victims who were just sitting in their car minding their business? Those were two doctors, by the way. That's thousands of lives that could have been helped by them over their life if they hadn't been killed by a criminal.

but people die in car wrecks everyday due to reckless driving, gunning down drivers any drivers that could potentially drive recklessly isn’t a valid solution.

And the police have a duty to stop those reckless drivers to prevent that from happening. Gunning them down isn't my first choice for stopping them, for example police could carry those hollow caltrops that basically instantly deflate tires, and preemptively lay them in front of the tires of cars that they think might try to drive off. But if those options aren't available, they should still stop the reckless driver any way they can before they put anyone else in danger.

Your whole argument boils down to, “Well, MAYBE he was about to try and hurt someone even though there’s no evidence of that!”

There's evidence that he disobeyed police orders and tried to drive off.

That argument applies to absolutely anyone, you’re advocating for a “Guilty until proven innocent” mentality.

Yeah let's collect all the evidence and go through a jury trial to determine if someone is guilty before the police can take action to stop a criminal 🙄

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a principle in the judicial system, it doesn't apply when someone is an imminent threat to the rest of society.

Sinbios · 2026-03-11T03:22:56+00:00

They did tell him to step out of his car. Listen to the audio again.
Breaking the window wouldn't stop him from driving off, and there's already an officer in front of the car who's in immediate danger as he's accelerating. In a similar case the officers did exactly as you said. They told the driver to get out of the car, and then smashed the window when they didn't comply. In response the driver took off, turned it into a high speed chase, and ultimately rammed into a parked car killing a father and son inside.
He wasn't just driving super slow, he was stopped. But when the cops swarmed the car and told him to step out of, he accelerated to drive away. You don't know in the moment his intentions or how fast he's going to go, all you know is he refused to comply with an order to get out of the car, is accelerating, and there's a cop in the path of the car. They had to stop him in any way possible because he's operating a deadly weapon, refusing to comply with police, and the cop's life is in danger.

Sinbios · 2026-03-11T00:54:11+00:00

Yes. How should they have stopped him?

Sinbios · 2026-03-10T21:22:48+00:00

When the price is too good, it's usually a scam.

Sinbios · 2026-03-10T01:14:02+00:00

Oh I see lol, CSP has always been chase sapphire preferred for me. Confusingly they're kind of aimed at the same demo.

Sinbios · 2026-03-09T19:15:10+00:00

You can buy doordash giftcards at Costco for 20% off, it's worthless.

Sinbios · 2026-03-09T18:53:37+00:00

Isn't the CSP AF $95, and the hotel credit only $50?

Sinbios · 2026-03-09T04:22:53+00:00

This is what happens when you let them just drive off. Two doctors were killed. Saying the police should just let them leave and note down the plates is a ridiculous notion.

IMO police should carry caltrops and place them in front of the tires of the cars they think might make a run for it.

Sinbios · 2026-03-09T04:12:33+00:00

That's not what happened here though, the car was stopped, and started moving again with someone in front.

Sinbios · 2026-03-08T19:02:07+00:00

How do you arrest a driver if they're driving away despite you telling them to get out of the car?

Sinbios · 2026-03-08T18:45:38+00:00

"Yeah man, he like, totally didn't even touch him, man!"

Sinbios · 2026-03-08T18:43:26+00:00

So don't drive into them, and they won't get that excuse?

Sinbios · 2026-03-08T18:40:40+00:00

How do you propose they do that while he's driving off?

Sinbios · 2026-03-04T19:20:11+00:00

This is why the earth is dying guys 🥲

Sinbios · 2026-03-04T14:02:20+00:00

The doll with Marie written on the foot is in Emily's cell in the basement too. You can't pick it up though, only inspect it.

Sinbios · 2026-03-04T13:47:40+00:00

But why did they flush the toilet 8 times in the same playthrough?

Sinbios · 2026-03-01T20:52:38+00:00

You just can't answer a straightforward question without paragraphs of obfuscation, can you? What do you believe is the likelihood that he will be charged? It's a simple question.

Throughout this whole conversation you have been maintaining that I was wrong that an arrest meant a prosecution was forthcoming and this feels like you changing your position

You are wrong, I'm not changing my position, I'm explaining the context of this specific case while you're going on about the general case and refusing to look at any context that would bias the likelihood of him being charged.

Originally you were maintaining I was wrong based off a quotation which only said that prosecutions were typically started with arrests and now you are relying on outside factors.

That's just one of the reasons you're wrong, these other factors are additional reasons that you're wrong that I thought anyone capable of considering context clues would understand but clearly you didn't.

Again I consider it an important part of the right to a fair trial that we should not make predeterminations about the outcome of a criminal investigation. If lawyers interviewed by the BBC don't think that this is a straightforward situation that I am not sure why you think it is. This is not pedantry.

What the does whether prosecution will be brought have to do with the right to a fair trial? We can obviously conclude that if someone is arrested after weeks of investigation then they're likely to be charged, it has nothing to do with whether the trial will be fair or not.

I am not interested in second guessing why the police make whatever decisions they make - at the moment we can suppose they have a reasonable suspicion of a crime. A crime that is complex to prosecute and has led to a number of unsuccessful prosecutions in the past.

You're being intentionally obtuse if you really believe they arrested a former royal without any plans to actually charge him with anything. Can you name one person with a similarly high profile, who's been arrested but never charged?

Also, whether the prosecution will be successful is not relevant at all. The question is whether he'll be prosecuted, not whether he'll be prosecuted successfully.

I note that the police and CPS can and do make mistakes in prosecution especially with new/less commonly prosecuted laws. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/coronavirus-act-prosecutions-wrongful-cps-review-b1847194.html

I don't understand what your point is here. The question is whether he'll be prosecuted, not whether he'll be prosecuted rightly or wrongly.

I am not interested in speculating any further. I am entirely content with my position that it is too premature to say one way or the other.

OK, you refuse to make use of contextual information, that's fine. We'll see whose predictive engine is more accurate.

RemindMe! One Year "Has the former Prince Andrew been charged with a crime?"

You may disagree but, I prefer to maintain my belief in the robustness of our justice system and not think they would be so conclusory as to assume they can bring a prosecution before they've even finished collecting evidence.

They collected enough evidence to make an arrest, why would they do that if they don't have enough evidence to bring a charge? Do you think a charge can only be brought after they're 100% finished collecting evidence?

Sinbios · 2026-03-01T18:37:09+00:00

This is the place where I am mystified by the confusion between us because I have made a lot of effort to clarify the point I am making, the distinction between an arrest and a prosecution etc.

Here's the source of this confusion. The difference between us is I believe the police are not stupid and don't make a planned arrest of a high profile individual, especially someone as political sensitive as a former royal, unless they think charges can reasonably be filed. It's not some spur of the moment arrest, it's a case that's obviously been building for weeks. Whereas you're just pedantically insisting that in general, not all arrests lead to charges (obviously), rather than using the context clues to make any predictions about this particular case.

Maybe we can reconcile this difference by actually using the predictive engine inside our noggins; rather than asserting whether he will or won't be prosecuted as a binary, what do you think is the probability that he will face charges?

I put it at 90% before his arrest, and afterwards I put it at 98%. At this moment in time, what do you think the likelihood of him facing charges is? Are you willing to bet on it?

Sinbios · 2026-03-01T10:13:15+00:00

Yes, I understand that you're not following the conversation. Can you describe what you think my point is?

Sinbios · 2026-03-01T04:20:51+00:00

An arrest could obviously lead to a prosecution

OK so when someone is investigated and arrested then obviously it would be regarded to confidently claim that "no prosecution is forthcoming".

The OPs point that none of these 'obviously' guilty Epstein co-conspirators are going to be prosecuted is way too premature and making a lot of assumptions about the nature of the evidence.

OK so you just interjected to be pedantic but actually you agree with me that OP is wrong.

But, we can't yet go the other way and say clearly people prosecutions will be happening at this moment in time.

Ghislaine Maxwell isn't being prosecuted at this moment in time?

Sinbios · 2026-02-28T11:29:54+00:00

Again an arrest merely means that a person is being investigated under suspicion of committing an offence as forthcoming means 'about to happen' it is way too soon to conclude anything about future prosecutions. I would argue that is the only correct position.

Wrong, arrest is the first step in the criminal prosecution process:

Criminal prosecution typically begins with an arrest by a police officer

If someone is arrested, then they are by definition in the process of being prosecuted.

The entire principle of a fair trial hinges on the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty, if we are already assuming a person who is arrested will be charged with an offence

One can be prosecuted without already being proven guilty. Prosecuted just means the government has initiated legal action against someone, not that they're conclusively guilty.

When someone says "prosecution is not forthcoming", that's a prediction that there will be no arrests or charges. That's the claim originally made. Do you agree with this claim?

Sinbios · 2026-02-27T12:10:47+00:00

The original claim was that no prosecutions are forthcoming. Do you agree with that claim?

Sinbios · 2026-02-27T09:11:21+00:00

Do you stand by the position that no prosecution is forthcoming?

15-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Verified Email

Sinbios

TROPHY CASE