Ten oz

You just literally described the bulk of audience for Rap today. Like any popular media it caters to and is designed for mass consumption by the largest audience of consumers with the purchasing power. Drake, Jay Z, Nicki Minaj , Cardi B, 6Nine, and on and on and on produce music to entertain suburbanites because that is the market with the disposable income to buy the music, concert tickets, and etc. Yeezys cost over $500 a pair. Does anyone really think youths in low income communities are the target audience for that, of course not.

You and I seem to philosophically view what is known vs unknown differently. "The purpose of stripes of a Tiger" isn't something I consider known. I don't think the word "purpose" even fits well into a scientific explanation in relation to what's known about striped cats. We can pinpoint the genes responsible, trace the the relationship of bigcats with and without stripes, examine diets, average lifespan, regional distribution, and etc. We can list all the camouflaging benefits and etc. However evolution is a nonlinear process. Over 99% of every species which has ever lived has died. Many different factors contribute to survival and which individual ones will or won't be best in combination isn't predictable. Every striped cat's stripping pattern is unique. Perhaps it was that ease in identifying between each other and not the camouflaging which most impacted reproduction and in turn their evolution. We don't know. So despite the understanding various benefits and biology of stripes I wouldn't say the that "purpose" of stripes is known. Many benefits are known and those benefits probably helped accomplish X,Y, Z throughout evolution but I would leave it at that. The definition of empirical is: "Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic", here. Historians are very well studied. Their work provides very meaningful insights into our past. Much of what they conclude can be highly accurate. However when contemporary evidence in any form (writings, art work, tombs, etc) is not available to verify something Historians can only speculate. The historicity of Jesus is not something empirically known. Not only isn't it empirically known but the issue isn't universally agreed upon by historians. Even among historians who agree Jesus existed there are differences in the basis of that conclusion. I understand Bart Ehrman's work. I simply do not believe it proves anything. If the corner stone of a Prosecutor's evidence centers around an unreliable witness that Prosecutor has no case. All the "evidence" for Jesus centers around the Gospels. It is the Gospel which provided context for all other bits of information used. Without the Gospel what difference does it make that Pontious Pilate existed? The Historicity of Jesus centers around the Gospel and the Gospel are literary works of mostly unknown origin, contradict themselves, include things known not to be true, and are meant as Religious text and not a record of history. The corner stone of evidence is an unreliable witness. It is that simply for me.

Both are chemicals which have a measurable and fairly predictable reaction in the human body. Just because you perceive one of the 2 to be more meaningful is besides the point. The experience of something in ones mind is not affirmation of it as fat. Feeling more productive on caffeine doesn't literally mean one is more productive just as feeling there is a god/peace/power in the universe or etc as described by people on Psilocybin doesn't literal mean that exists. You are insisting the strength of the impression left by the experience affirms the experience as something which must be greater than merely a hallucination. No evidence proves that. Rather the evidence simply proves an experience is felt.

I was comparing two chemicals which people testify to having an experience from. I wasn't comparing the experience. What is the difference?

The research you are citing relies entirely on peoples ability to recall a drug induced experience where the specific drug and quantity used were designed to cause said experience. People drink coffee in the morning because the caffeine provides a specific experience of energy and alertness. The experience can be measured and is known to be real. Does that mean that coffee drinkers, or rather daily caffeine consumers, are definitively more productive? That to a person anyone who became a coffee drinker would be more productive overall throughout their life? Rhetorical questions. That has obviously not been proved There are number coffee drinkers who live far less productive lives than non-coffee drinkers and vice versa. My point being that an experience be real as an experience doesn't make the natural of that experience true. II prefer coffee in the morning because I like the experience of feeling ready to go. However I can accomplish everything the same without it overall.

I understand why you and Eise are exasperated by Moontanman's response. Moontanman appears to be disregarding cited scholarly work. However that work, while extensive and done by people respected in field, are just philosophical positions of opinion. They are not proof on anything. What I am getting from Moontanman's posts is that they will not accept philosophical opinions as citations of fact.

@DirtyChai, Obviously more police officers are required to police more people. Larger populations are obviously going to have more of everything in total numbers: schools, malls, fire fighters, police officers, and etc. That is as true for cities that are overwhelmingly white as they are for cities which are highly diverse. There are 550 thousand black people living in Detroit. There are 42 million black people living in the Unite States. Millions of black people live in rural areas throughout the south other states like Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Georgia, Texas, the Carolina's, Maryland, Virginia, and etc. Using Detroit as your model for how black people broadly live as it relates to population density doesn't work. It is like saying Salt Lake City, Boise, Boulder, Scottsdale, Madison, or etc are reflective of how white people live. These places represent small fractions of the total population.

I assume this means you do not feel race or gender has been shown to be a factor in this case? If so you are technically correct though I personally have a hard time believing that if the Officer walked into the wrong apartment and it was occupied by a teenage white female it ends the same way. I cannot prove it but to CharonY's point I certainly don't see instances in the news where unarmed teenage white females are being shot by police officers.

This is familiar to me. I have older sibling who live unfortunate lives (I will spare you the details). I think because of all the addition efforts my parent have had to put into my siblings they form strong bonds with them and as a result continue to be more active and generally interested i their lives. I came to the conclusion very early on that I did not want to be the person I was being raised to be. That I had to find a way to be learn more that what I had be taught. That also meant not sharing myself with my parents or accepting their advice which only contributed to them being more invested in my siblings. The transition into adulthood isn't easy and everyone has their own journey. Most roads toward independence initially look like failure. Some people have warm home lives and stay in the adolescent state through college into their early to mid 20's while others are on their butts out of the house at 18yrs of age fending for themselves. Which ever the case one still must live their life. *You can't change who people, other than yourself, are and it is a fool's errand to try.

Depending on your age the constant negative emotions could be hormones. Incorporating some additional activity like hiking, swimming, cycling, or team sports into your daily routine might help. Hobbies I find to be helpful as, depending on the hobby, there can be many small moments of achievement. For me validating ones life is less important than simply living ones life. I was already born. I already exist. I am a human. That is all the validation to live that I need. It is all the validation I think you or anyone else needs in my opinion.

True but it has gotten significantly better. Throughout Europe, and the world broadly, nobles and royalty could basically kill people indiscriminately and rape anyone they wanted. People use to literally own other people. Society has come a long way.There have been many victories is the fight for equality and I'd argue those who are pushing for equality are arguably winning the war. The war just isn't over yet.

People use to scream, cry, and pass out over for Sinatra, then Elvis, then the Beatles, Rollin' Stones, Michael Jackson, Prince, and son and so on. Every generation have artists they fall in love with. Nothing about what is happening rap music today is so different than previous generations. Separately I would argue that pure Rap no longer exists. It is all just various mixtures of popular music. One verse might be rapped yet other verses sung. Fluid rappers like Krs-one, Nas, Slick Rick, DJ Quick, and etc are gone and today's landscape is littered with acts which are difficult to place in a single genre like Childish Gambino and rapper who seem to specialize in guest appearances like Drake.

I think it is bigger than just police officers. Rep. Duncan Hunter has been indicted by a federal grand jury for campaign finance crimes and he is still favored to win re-election in November. Who breaks the law always seems to matter more than what law was broken here in the U.S.. It is why white collar felonies seldom come with real prison time, why the opioid crisis is a health issue and not a criminal issue, and so on. Laws are written and voted on by people and people are bias at best and corrupt at worst. Our laws reflect as much.Donald J. Trump is our President for %&#$-sake. Police here in the U.S. kill more people in an average month than all the police in the UK, Germany, and Japan combined (similar population) kill every few years. I personally do not think the discretion we give police is reasonable. I think there are given far too much discretion based on an over estimate of risk. Being a Police Officer is not even one of the 10 most dangerous jobs in the U.S. TOP 10 and known of the people in the top ten are armed are kill anywhere near the number of people Police in the U.S. do.

Half of the total total population of the country live in the top 30 metropolitan areas, About 100 million people live in just the top 10 alone. The majority everyone in the country lives in cities or suburbs. Those living in actual rural areas are in the minority regardless of race. Many rural areas have much higher crime rates than densely populated cities. You are not speaking to real data but rather just repeating popular notions.

How do you know what Paul's motives, intentions, beliefs, and thoughts overall were? As for what "nobody would have com up with", history is full of things which were "come up with" for the first time. By your criterion language itself shouldn't exist because it required invention without precedence.

Lectures are fine provided you accurately link them as representing notions you agree with and not evidence which validate your beliefs. People given drugs in a controlled environment with the goal of inducing a particular experience is not evidence that god exists. At best the John Hopkins Psilocybin Research Project is evidence that Psilocybin can produce a supernatural sensation. There are many types of psychiatric drugs capable of producing a lot of different types of experiences. Yes, hallucinations can be brought on by dehydration, starvation, lack of sleep, fever, physical fatigue, lack of oxygen, a wide variety of health issues, and so on. No one here is arguing against the existence of hallucinations. History is full of drugs which came with the promise of making people smarter, stronger, happier, and etc. Cocaine was initially viewed as a fantastic focus drug that helped people get work done, steroids made people more youthful providing boost to energy and strength, opioids are an excellent pain killer. Over initial adoptions of drugs have resulted in millions of ruined lives. Kids today are using adderall and Ritalin as a study drugs to get better grades yet the link between those drugs and suicides rates isn't fully understood. We should always be cautious with mind/personality altering drugs.

I would take this a step further and say it is only evidence that those involved in authoring the documents (anonymous) believed it sought to make others believe that a savior would walk amongst them.

+1, I agree with this but think there is an important additional factors that grow out of unconscious bias. Apathy towards the notion that racism is a problem unabless the racists which do exist to work in the open. Some laws and policies are explicitly designed to disenfranchised and hurt specific groups of people. Refusing to identify that in pursuit of defending assumed views about race among the majority allows room for the ill-intentioned to cover. Lots of people who believe themselves to be fair minded end up supporting racist and sexist laws unwittedly because they are simply don't take the concepts seriously enough. Just as lots of people who otherwise care about clean air and water support policies destructive to both out if denial that corporations would do wrong or rather misplaced faith that free markets are self regulating. Bad people exist in all forms and every type of evil needs to be addressed. George Zimmerman spotted a teenage kid, parked his truck, got out with a gun, followed the teen, and then when he ended up killing the teen just a couple of blocks from home Zimmerman successfully argued self defense. No witnesses to what happened. Just Zimmerman's word that the teenage kid, one which Zimmerman chose to arm himself and follow, randomly attacked him out of the blue. Not only did Zimmerman win the case but police initially weren't even going to charge Zimmerman. It took national pressure just to get prosecutors involved. In my opinion laws need to impose responsibilities on gun owners. Fear as the lone criteria for shooting someone opens the door to nearly anyone being able to justify killing someone in nearly any situation.

Whom is breaking the law in the U.S. is always relevant as the being broke, sadly. That is why some many people protest our Justice system. Our President is an unindicted co-conspirator to felon campaign finance crimes yet he threatens and bullies Law Enforcement official on social media form the White House much of the country is okay with it. Colin Kaepernick quietly took a knee (100% legal) and he his professional sports career is over. That is what Justice in the U.S. looks like.

Still a very messy situation in Syria. I wish the media here in the U.S. would spend less time discussing who hates working for Trump & why they hate it and focus on important developments in Syria and Yemen. I remember here in the U.S. just after 9/11 there is all this surprise about over the fact that a country named Afghanistan existed, terrorists loosely affiliated with the CIA lived there, and a lot of them hated the U.S.. "Why do they hate us" led many of News broadcasts. In the years that flowed many politicians insisted that as a nation we could not never take our eyes off the ball ever again. That the U.S. had been asleep at the wheel and not focused even on evil around the world. An "Axis of Evil" was identified and it was declared that preemption was justified. Today the U.S. is again asleep at the wheel. Due to lack of media coverage most people I interact with assume the Syrian and Yemen conflicts are settled. Flippant U.S. policy which initially supported insurgency with money and weapons only to lose interest and pull away has resulted in numerous causalities and fostered resentment across the region similar to Afghanistan in the 80's. It is a serious problem and I hope it doesn't continue to remain ignored.

I understand but don't approve of the slowness. The office walked into a person's home and killed them. Had she not been a police officer she would have been arrested at the scene. The charge would also be more than manslaughter. This happened in Texas, capital punishment leader of the U.S.. manslaughter as an initial charge (most charges are lowered in pre-trial) is a slap on the wrist for murder.

Better than I feared. Looks like they will at least pursue manslaughter charges.

In my opinion it is Second Degree Murder. If roles were reversed and it was the man walking into the Police Officer's apartment and killing her First Degree Murder charges might be possible. One only needs to recall the Trayvon Martin case to know that the law isn't interpreted the same for everyone though. The Officer legally was armed, can easily make the case that she was afraid for her life (iron clad argument in the U.S.), and called it in after shooting the guy. On paper the only error she made was accidentally walking into the wrong apartment. Without being able to show that she knowingly entered the wrong apartment no jury in the U.S. would convict her of a crime in my opinion. Rather than criminal charges I am guess the family will have to sue for wrongful death. That is winnable. Hopefully I am wrong but the officer was not arrested and as of the latest updates I have seen she hasn't even been officially questioned yet. In my opinion this is a case that highlights one of the failures of our loose gun laws. Law doesn't require any higher levels of responsibility for those who are armed. So in this case that fact she was armed when accidentally entered the home carries additional weight. Then there is the fearing for ones life criterion. One doesn't actually have to be in danger, even if armed, they simply need to reasonably believe they are in danger. Again, no additional responsibility for being armed.

I agree they should leave them in a safe at work as well however I fear I am in the minority here in the U.S. . Even among moderates and people who favor more gun control I doubt many would have an issue with police bring their guns home.