Man, they’re amongst the worst when it comes to self esteem. You’d think that wouldn’t be the case - but in my experience, as long as there’s someone wealthier than them. As long as there’s some club they can’t get into.  People are going to be looking for ways to compensate and make themselves feel better about what…

This is true, and I can get that. And while I don’t generally have a problem with it, when you’re moralizing with one hand (as much as I actually agree with a lot of the moralizing), and doing this with the other - it’s a pretty stark contrast.

Jalopnik: SUVs are a pox on civilization. No one needs something this big and this fuel inefficient. They represent an existential danger to pedestrians. To cyclists. To small children. To our planet. Our thirst for more, and bigger, and faster is an irredeemable flaw in our culture.

I would have taken another tactic. Definitely try to de-escalate a little better.

The thing that I don’t get about the sovereign citizen / freemen on the land adherents is that even if they’re right - it demonstrably, clearly, does not work. No court has been forced to do anything. No officer has acknowledged their lack of jurisdiction. No government has given them their special hidden money. Do…

The Alberta Court of Queens Bench went ape-shit on a freemen on the land in a 2012 decision Meades vs Meades.

This might be the most sociopathic thing I’ve read today, after the lawyer’s quote in the article at least.

I have to imagine that you’re being intentionally dense here. I think it’s clear what I’m saying:

The lawyer then drank deep from his chalice filled with the blood of the innocent, let out a maniacal cackle, swept his cape over his face and descended back into the depths of hell from whence he came.

I would hope that no one is surprised by this. Technology and privacy are, I think, inherently at odds. And I don’t think there’s much that can be done for that. It’s a bargain we’ve made - and are continuing to make. We accept a loss of privacy, and all the risks that go along with it, in exchange for convenience.

The only thing is that any lawyer worth their license to practice should be able to easily make this case. And I’m guessing that in this case, the lawyer farmed most of the research out to a junior associate or student.

I’m glad he did it pro bono, because $7500 to go into court and say “you can’t break a law that doesn’t exist” seems a bit steep.

Agreed on Self-Propelled Artillery - but it’s still ugly and ungainly. I was torn between this and the Porsche Tiger and it just seemed that the Tiger as awkward as it looks, was still a little less unbalanced than this.

I think I’m actually more offended by the inclusion of the 914 and the 928 than the 356 which, I agree, kind of looks like an upside down bathtub on wheels.

I think this Porsche engineered Elefant would be right up there.

You should probably read the rest of my comments.

Agreed - and those types of decisions are why I’d hate to be a cop, and generally try to stay objective. Even when there are so many egregious examples of abuse that make this difficult.

Gah! Dodge has introduced an epistemological conundrum from which I can’t escape.

I’m torn.

Right, but that’s the point isn’t it? You’re used to working with different time zones on the East Coast. If one jurisdiction changes how time is measured and the other doesn’t - that’s introducing a huge source of potential error by shaking up the status quo. People would eventually get used to it. But why go through…