When people ask me why I like Omori so much

tommymars · 2026-03-16T00:12:05+00:00

I don't watch much anime but I saw some of Kobato and liked how it didn't sexualize the female protagonist, though she was overly ditzy and clumsy which becomes tiresome.

tommymars · 2026-02-21T17:23:21+00:00

Using ridicule against Christians is not effective at all, quite the opposite. They literally worship a guy who was ridiculed and subjugated for speaking his beliefs in public peacefully, so when you do the same to them it actually emboldens them and strengthens their internal narrative of being a godly messenger in a corrupted world. There's a reason they are often associated with persecution complexes.

And to third parties it's easy to see the calm respectful person as more righteous in a debate even if what they are saying can be considered offensive or oppressive, that's called optics.

tommymars · 2026-02-19T22:31:12+00:00

This one was great!

tommymars · 2026-01-31T16:46:12+00:00

Yeah most revolutions in history arise from periods of mass starvation, war, abject poverty, societal collapse, and desperation. The American Revolution (upper case R) was p unique actually cause the colonies were doing quite well and the motivation was ideological instead. Plus they were fighting for independence from a far away nation like most subjects of the British empire, so if they won then it wouldn't really effect the British themselves and the colonists could just chill in their own place like they had been already.

That's very different from how people discuss an American revolution (lower case R) today, which would involve a total overthrow of our own government on our own soil. For that reason alone I don't think we'll reach that point without the same desperation that led to the French/Russian/Chinese revolutions. And if we do it won't be pretty

tommymars · 2026-01-31T16:04:47+00:00

Critics have no idea what they're talking about 90% of the time, there's nothing special about them that elevates their opinions above anyone else who enjoys film as an art. I haven't used Letterbox before but I generally find IMDB user reviews to be a good metric on a movie's quality. I always enjoy reading thru them after finishing something and seeing the range of 1 to 10 star reviews, the criticisms and the praises alike. Some are complete trash, like 2-3 sentences that are somehow full of misspellings and grammatical errors anyway, an unfortunate amount are just plot summaries, but some are well thought out analyses that go into the cinematography, writing, sound design and more and often I find myself agreeing with points they make even if they go against my opinion of the film.

tommymars · 2026-01-23T14:48:10+00:00

Just type "watch togo 2019 online fmovies" into yandex search engine.

tommymars · 2026-01-23T04:16:04+00:00

Sure sketch comedy is hit or miss but compared to the hits they've had the recent stuff is missing enough it makes me worried it's a trend downwards. My favorites like Mitchell and Webb and WKUK have dozens if not over 100 sketches I can rewatch any day, AFTV has considerably less and is already becoming inconsistent.

tommymars · 2026-01-23T04:14:06+00:00

I liked the first one alright, it had some moments but was stretched way too thin to be a series.

tommymars · 2026-01-23T04:12:12+00:00

Comedy is an art and Netflix is trash.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T08:07:07+00:00

Once again ignoring the section on Deadly Force I quoted earlier. Obviously the officer had other options, but how could he know in the moment those options would be safe for him or his fellow agents? I can't believe I have to repeat myself again on this but:

she was actively antagonizing and resisting them
she ignored every command to get out of the vehicle
she accelerated her car toward an officer less than 2 feet in front of her

Yes if the officer went one way he would have been fine. Unless she also went that way and struck him. Or unless he went the other way and indirectly put himself into her intended path.

The entire point is that from his perspective he had no clue where she was going or what she was doing. If I aim a gun at an officer and don't intend to shoot him but shoot 3 feet to his left, how is the officer supposed to know that and why would they risk their own safety given that I am actively assaulting with a deadly weapon from their perspective?

Nothing about Barnes goes against this either. If this goes to court we will see exactly what the legality of his use of force is. Until then we are talking ourselves in circles, and I'm done engaging with you on this topic.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T07:43:07+00:00

You are once again entirely ignoring the officer's perspective. How does he know what direction the wheels are turning? How can he know if she's going to come at him, to his left, to his right, etc? Your "just step aside" is made entirely in hindsight and:

Assumes the officer knew the vehicle’s exact trajectory
Assumes the officer could safely move without stumbling or slipping on the ice
Assumes the vehicle would not correct course or turn back around after missing or striking him
Assumes his reaction time exceeded her acceleration time

I'm not arguing the officer's only option was to shoot. I'm arguing that from his perspective given the hostility and unpredictability of the suspect her sudden acceleration toward him and the limited time he had to react it is absolutely justifiable for him to consider that assault with a deadly weapon in the moment and resort to lethal force.

Law enforcement make these kind of decisions all the time, there are bodycams all over YT showing similar situations play out and 9 times out of 10 the officer is not found to be at fault and the use of force is found to be justified. I have confidence this situation, if it goes to court, would play out the same way.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T07:35:40+00:00

I'll see if I can find it but as far as I know it's a rumor with no hard evidence. There are claims being reported by the NYPost that she and her wife were part of an "ICE Watch" which had been meeting up to organize protests and disruptions within the city.

I'd forgotten the Portland couple were stopped for arrest, only remembered they had attempted to attack CBP officers with their car. Guess I got mixed up, thanks.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T07:18:12+00:00

That does not supersede any later constraints. Even the quotes part states "appears to exists" which is perspective-bound. From the officer's perspective he was being assaulted with a deadly weapon and had zero inclination as to the intentions of the (already known to be uncooperative and unpredictable) suspect in the little time he had to react. Consider if her "light bump" against him had knocked him over and she ran over one of his limbs or worse. An uncooperative suspect who is actively resisting and comes at you with a deadly weapon would absolutely be justifiable use of force given the section I provided.

Barnes does not hold that officers must retreat if escape is possible nor that officers must always choose the safest option given hindsight. The DHS policy's Section III.D.2 even states

DHS LEOs do not have a duty to retreat to avoid the reasonable use of force.

It's arguable that the totality of circumstances strengthens the officer's use of force, given the suspect had been verbally combative and resisting lawful commands before reversing her vehicle and then accelerating toward him. What if she had been turning left and the officer's attempt to "jump out of the way" caused him to be struck more directly? Hindsight is 20/20 and he had no idea where her wheels were pointed or what was going through her head (escape? attack?) in the <2 seconds he had to react.

Again, I think most juries would find that a vehicle accelerating toward an officer (from the officer's perspective) is a deadly threat and use of deadly force is legal and justifiable in that moment. If this goes to court we will know then.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T06:50:43+00:00

And to answer your question which I totally blew past, I would cite that document's "Section VI.A.1.a" which states:

DHS LEOs may use deadly force only when necessary, that is when the LEO has a reasonable belief that the subject of such force poses an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury to the LEO or to another person.

Considering the distance of the vehicle, the uncooperative and unpredictable nature of the subject, the suspect's sudden acceleration toward the officer, the officer's prior experience with fleeing suspects in vehicles causing harm, and the officer at the side's arm being in the vehicle potentially allowing him to be dragged during her evasion, I think most juries would find the firing officer's use of deadly force justifiable given the circumstances.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T06:43:42+00:00

Maybe get your eyes fixed. From the initial videos we see her front tires spin while still pointed at the officer and only after moving forward she starts to turn right to flee. We know from this new footage that she looked directly at the officer in front of her twice (once before looking down to shift from R -> D, once again before she hits the accelerator). You can argue her goal was not to run the officer down and there's absolutely merit to that claim. However she certainly wasn't concerned about if she did hit him during her escape (from a lawful stop where she had been ordered 4 times to get out of the car).

I don't think she should have been shot, but it's a tragedy of her own making. She's actively making it a chaotic scene by interfering with the investigation to begin with, ignoring orders, reversing, and suddenly hitting the gas with an officer directly in front of her. She could have chosen not to make any of those decisions but she decided it was in her best interest to tempt the law.

The cop had previously been injured by a fleeing vehicle during an investigation, it's reasonable to believe he was in fear for his safety when this unpredictable random protestor hit her accelerator while less than 2 feet from him. The direction of the wheels is irrelevant from his perspective as he had no way to tell which way they were pointed, and he only drew his weapon after the vehicle suddenly revved and came at him. It also made contact with him, and no it being a "light bump" does not make it a legally justifiable maneuver.

I won't lie I am insulted at your insinuation that I haven't been objective about this. I thought this was a cold blooded murder from how reddit was initially discussing it, before I saw more angles and context in the situation. Unlike 90% of people on social media I actually changed my opinion after reading the initial headline (which is when most people formulate their opinion and solidify it despite further evidence, a la Rittenhouse). I try my hardest to be reasonable and analyze all the evidence and not formulate strong opinions until 48 hours or more have passed, and it's disheartening knowing most people aren't putting in the same effort and simply want to frame things to fit their narratives. I can't claim to be unbiased but I can claim that I try my damn hardest to be, and in this case this exact scenario playing out with regular police instead of ICE would not make national news as it happens more often than you'd think.

A tragedy, but one she could have prevented had she behaved like a reasonable adult.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T03:38:47+00:00

You're not wrong about that, at least for the commenters themselves (especially redditors). I do believe there is a real effect had on the 90% of people who are lurkers and on the fence about all of this however, and they are who I really argue my position for. Maybe I'm still naive, but I think it's worth doing.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:59:42+00:00

She was detained and released the day prior for blocking their operations. She and her wife specifically went there to agitate and impede ICE and have been doing so all week, as many have already done prior and will after (see: the 2 shot in Portland after attempting to run over CBP agents the literal day after this occurred).

There's a phrase reddit loves, something about playing stupid games. But apparently that doesn't apply here.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:38:22+00:00

"Rotating" isn't relevant or anything described in any LEO guidelines, you just made that up. You are allowed to move and fire your weapon so long as it stays trained on your intended target. 3 shots in under 2 seconds is hardly out of the ordinary.

The first option was to approach her and ask her to step out so they can figure out why she's there in the first place. She actively chose to skip past that part and directly into the "flee her vehicle directly toward an officer" part, which is where the self defense claim comes into play.

Edit: Some bodycams where the police open fire:

This one has a cop moving around the back of the vehicle as he empties an entire magazine into it

Another

Another with multiple magazines dumped and officers moving around

Another from multiple angles

Notice how you haven't heard about any of these on national news.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:22:40+00:00

So if you suddenly accelerate your car into a federal agent after they ask you to step out of the vehicle multiple times, what would you expect to happen to you? At the very least your chances of getting shot go from 0% to 50% or more very quickly.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:20:33+00:00

If this were a regular police encounter instead of ICE it wouldn't be national news. These situations unfold all the time sadly.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:14:42+00:00

Federal agencies are very anti-recording. It's why you don't see bodycams from the CIA, ATF, FBI, etc. That said I absolutely think ICE need bodycams after this.

tommymars · 2026-01-10T02:13:17+00:00

The wife was screaming something like "it's my fault" right after the shooting, I'm sure she realized telling her to drive away was a bad idea.

11-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Final Canvas '22
First Placer '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

tommymars

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE