Rediphile

joined 2 years ago
[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 24 points 2 years ago (3 children)

And it has literally nothing to do with ethics and is profit driven. The entire point of advertising is to make money.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 11 points 2 years ago (3 children)

They will suffer. And I'm willing to be among them as it's worth it long term. The alternative of infinite growth isn't a realistic possibility in a world with finite resources.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 19 points 2 years ago (9 children)

Good. Lowering the birth rate at the global scale = more resources per person.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

You say 'what would happen if they didn't chase cars?' as if it's hypothetical, but many places already do this.

So, what happens? They will turn on lights and sirens speed up a bit and make it clear the car should pull over. If it doesn't, they continue to follow it with lights and sirens. If the bad guy starts driving in a manner dangerous to the public specifically in an attempt to flee, they back off. And then radio the vehicle description to a unit further ahead. Sometimes the unit ahead is unmarked, finds it, and is able to follow at safe speed. Later try to arrest occupants when they get out or can be pinned with confidence. There are also other tools available like traffic cameras and aircraft.

Yes, this sometimes causes people to get away. But it also sometimes saves lives of random bystanders...so some places decide it as a worthwhile trade off. And no these countries aren't wastelands with Mad Max roads of death.

You are right about some situations being more dangerous not to pursue. Which is why if someone is intentionally running over people, or shooting at everyone, or some other very intense situation... the police don't back off. But for a speeding ticket, for sure backing off.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

I'm not defending mass gun ownership at all and was completely clear about that in the initial comment. And I certainly am aware that all people who end up accidentally shooting themselves did not plan to do so... and I never suggested otherwise.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years ago

Totally. But is anyone honestly suggesting that over 50% of all owners have had an accidental discharge?

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, I fully agree. It's well supported with data. As is my statement.

I'm honestly confused how people took my comment to be pro gun at all. I just don't like misrepresenting data.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm not sure I understand. Are you trying to say that 100% of irresponsible gun owners are also gun owners? Well, yeah.... that's definitely correct.

Or am I missing something?

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 1 points 2 years ago

Yes, you are essentially repeating what I said.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Agreed. Would love to see stricter control over who is able to drive.

And would also love to see gun ownership in the USA at least start to catch up slightly to vehicle use regulations when it comes to things like licensing and registration.

[–] Rediphile@lemmy.ca 10 points 2 years ago

I was taught in school exactly what we as a species needed to do to stop global warming when I was in elementary school... This was like 25 years ago.

But we didn't do any of what was required and instead added like 2.5 billion to the population since then. Great job guys! Lol

view more: ‹ prev next ›