Hangouts was pretty much perfect, and they blew it up, those maniacs. Switching is annoying and I’m not doing it again, just to have them change their minds again.

Seriously? That was their defense? Well at least I understand now. I knowit was mentioned but I guess I wasn’t reading well enough to pick that up. I figured it was just being mentioned in passing, after all, anybody would want to go on exotic trips, blabla bla.

Seriously? That was their defense? Well at least I understand now. I knowit was mentioned but I guess I wasn’t reading well enough to pick that up. I figured it was just being mentioned in passing, after all, anybody would want to go on exotic trips, blabla bla.

I really don’t understand why all the reports on this case focus on the Instagram thing so much?

In general I would agree and I actually think that’s an interesting conversation to have (as I think both extremes are bad), but I would also argue that *even from a prescriptivist standpoint* they’re wrong— at the most basic level they’re ignoring American vs. British English, but they’re not able to actually justify…

Your poor grasp of English grammar and sentence structure abounds in every example... but thank you for proving the points I made wit a live example.

Bullshit. We don’t plural every plural word we abbreviate.

I’m really not happy about how ketamine is the new favorite. They’re trying to use it here as an alternative to fentanyl on the ambulance...I am not at all convinced it’s a good idea.

Anachronism, I would think

Every job should have this. If he *wasn’t * a murderer, he shouldn’t lose his house just because they drag their butts on the investigation.

I’ve answered you fucking question multiple times, you’re just too fucking dense

Sorry, did you have an argument? Because you didn’t actually respond to my points, you just repeated “nuh uh”. Pro-tip: you don’t get to say “your logic is absurd” without making an actual argument.

This is good satire. 10/10, would snark again.

Look, I get it: You have strong opinions, and you don’t care about reality, dagnabbit! But, this is tedious. Allow me to break it down for you:

Well, I would say their job requires them to have a basic understanding of how to approach a scene and suspect. Which begins long before that “split second” that you’re appealing to without answering my question *or* addressing the fact that *they were wrong*, and as a result *killed an unarmed man*.

How about just waiting *until there’s an actual threat*. Remember that here *there wasn’t one*. They shot an unarmed man. The bar should be pretty darn high—or are you saying (to throw your own kind of argument back) that they should just shoot everybody they want because they *might* have a gun?

Their profession doesn’t matter, but your bigotry aside, it’s irresponsible advice without qualifiers. BSI.

I’m a paramedic, which means I have limited experience with “kits” (we obviously carry narcan, and it even looks like the one in the picture! But we carry it in our drug box with other meds, and we have options as to route, sort of like how we don’t carry epi autoinjectors, but we carry epi and the means to administer…

Not to be a dick, but I gotta take some issues here.

“ if you don’t want to look at the values of each instance on their own, you’re making the same all inclusive judgement that you’re preaching against.”