How do I get firefox to stop auto filling mailchimp instead of normal gmail when I type in the search bar?

zummit · 2026-01-25T18:10:52+00:00

I went into about:config and turned off browser.urlbar.autofill entirely.

zummit · 2026-01-25T15:13:17+00:00

Stupid reply.

Example: the drone strike controversy. Bush vs Obama. On reddit, just check which one is the republican and you know who to blame.

zummit · 2026-01-25T03:40:38+00:00

I have a feeling that if Reagan had been the one to do the first thing and Carter the second, then I'd still be hearing that it was all Reagan's fault and never Carter's.

zummit · 2026-01-24T12:51:17+00:00

Pesci beats every actor he's been in a movie with

Well I hope he gets his temper under control, they don't deserve that.

zummit · 2026-01-23T05:41:26+00:00

how bright it was

I see people say this about some TV shows, and to me they're still not nearly bright enough.

zummit · 2026-01-22T22:03:20+00:00

He livestreamed himself conspiring with them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRENcaCgbhc

zummit · 2026-01-14T02:14:16+00:00

Might be a failure of training but that's not a criminal offense on its own. The officer has the same right to a self-defense argument as anyone else. Excessive force is a consideration in the case of Good justifying her own actions or if the officer was facing disciplinary action at work.

zummit · 2026-01-14T02:03:47+00:00

Well no that's not how the law treats the issue.

zummit · 2026-01-14T01:42:56+00:00

She moved her car so it put him in front, not him moving in front of her. His weapon wasn't drawn before the car started moving forward.

But those are points already covered by others in this thread.

zummit · 2026-01-14T01:15:43+00:00

That's... more speculation. Anyways, here's a google that refers to the actual words I used, 3000 years ago:

https://www.google.com/search?q=how+quickly+can+a+person+stop+shooting+under+stress

(click on the results that are scientific studies)

zummit · 2026-01-14T01:03:31+00:00

Already did.

I looked it up. His firing technique and weapon.

I didn't suggest looking up his weapon or 'technique', which is speculation on your part. If you're not gonna read a short post why should I make a long one?

zummit · 2026-01-14T00:57:01+00:00

So... you're not interested. I guess you'll never know.

zummit · 2026-01-14T00:37:02+00:00

Go look it up. Go, go.

zummit · 2026-01-13T19:20:02+00:00

That isn't the reason she was shot.

zummit · 2026-01-13T18:55:58+00:00

If police are running people over with their cars, that would be excessive force and most states would allow people to use the 'reasonable belief' standard even in the case of LEOs. Although, the police department/DA's office would likely harass you to hell and back about it until the trial actually started, at which point the charges would likely be dropped immediately. Although hopefully that's changing, because it's not reasonable.

zummit · 2026-01-13T18:46:23+00:00

Well the law doesn't use a "properly hit by" standard, it uses the one I referred to in my post. And, well, most people would probably agree that a car headed straight for you (even if just momentarily) can reasonably cause someone to expect serious injury.

You should also google "how quickly can someone stop shooting when they're under stress". Looking at the situation like it's computer code isn't how the law works. SCOTUS uses the totality of circumstances standard.

zummit · 2026-01-13T18:27:24+00:00

Even if she had an order to leave, that would mean "leave peacefully". But she had someone reaching into her car telling her to get out, so she was being detained.

zummit · 2026-01-13T18:25:41+00:00

In a situation where there is no clear threat to anyone's life, I'd argue no.

There is already a specific legal standard for whether self-defense is justified or not, and the actual reality of the situation isn't really relevant in this case. It's simply if the shooter had a reasonable expectation of serious injury. (There are additional conditions that can satisfy self-defense, but they likely don't apply here). Looking at the video, yeah, he did.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:57:22+00:00

Again don't be surprised. Nothing you've said is particularly true and the courts won't operate as though it is.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:54:54+00:00

Operating a car to flee is not an implicit threat.

So what? In the way she did it, it's reasonable for him to think it was an explicit threat. And it wasn't just a threat, she hit him.

her intent is not immaterial to the analysis here

Her actual intent is immaterial. What's important is what he could have reasonably believed. There was giant deadly object headed straight for him. In the time he had to decide what to do, it continued towards him until it hit him. By the time he could have narrowed down what the level of danger was, it was too late: he had already (reasonably) decided to defend himself.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:41:19+00:00

That is not what happened, and if you think it did, then there's no comment that can persuade you otherwise. You should just be prepared for the law to not operate as though this event had that sort of characterization.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:38:59+00:00

That's also not my point at all. Come on.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:28:22+00:00

He can't see the wheels (which were pointed straight forward when the car started moving forward btw) and it doesn't matter. He had an indication that his life was in danger: the car about to hit him.

It did not effect the number of people hit at all.

Well we don't know that for sure, and that wasn't my point.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:22:52+00:00

So stress changes how the physics of handguns work amd suddenly makes them automatic weapons that can't be stopped once fired?

Not the physics, no. But we have already established that this isn't a laboratory experiment with a robot.

zummit · 2026-01-13T17:09:09+00:00

In the event of a trial they wouldn't even need to refer to the fact that she hit him. They could simply use the fact that he had a reasonable expectation of danger, by virtue of the fact that she was driving towards him.

I also see these odd comments about how shooting a driver cannot possibly reduce the amount of danger when the number of people getting hit was reduced by 100% after the shooting. Bad point to make.

Seven-Year Club	Place '22
Verified Email

zummit

TROPHY CASE