unicorn

All of what you say is probably true. I agree he should probably have waited for backup, unless there was some urgency in the message suggesting someone's life was in danger. I don't find it persuasive that the gun wasn't directly pointed at him, since obviously that can change in less than half a second. It may be that the deputy has the lion's share of culpability. The cop may not have followed standard operating procedures, and, if so, he should suffer the legal consequences. That being said, the victim's best options, as you said, were to either not open the door, or to open it without the handgun in his hand. Even if the deputy was mostly at fault, I feel it's bad judgment to respond to a banging announcing a cop (even if it's someone who's really not a cop, just someone pulling a practical joke) with gun in hand. And, according to the video, this was in broad daylight, not the middle of the night.

A family of a deceased airman is suing because a sheriff's deputy shot him while answering the call. At first, it sounds pretty bad, but then on reviewing the deputy's body camera, the deputy can be heard screaming twice "Sheriff's office. Open the door!", and it clearly shows the late airman with a gun/pistol in his right hand. I don't know what the police policies are, and it may be the case that the deputy is mostly culpable, but is there a single member on this forum who'd state that if he were answering the door to someone who identified himself as coming from the sheriff's department, he'd come with a gun in his hand? The relevant footage starts at 3:40:

Yes, thanks for pointing out that something can be illegal due to violations of civil code, not simply criminal code. In California, defamation is a violation of civil code, but one cannot go to jail for this: https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/personal-injury/harm-to-reputation/defamation/ "Defamation is an invasion of the interest in reputation. Under California law, it is a broad term for false statements made that cause damage to someone’s good standing. California Civil Code (Cal. Civ. Code) §44 states that defamation is affected by either libel or slander. If a statement is made verbally, it is slander. If made in writing, it is libel. Cal. Civ. Code §45 and Cal. Civ. Code §46 provide the definitions for both libel and slander. In some states, libel can sometimes be charged as a crime and be punishable by a fine and jail time. However, in California, people who have been defamed are limited to their right to recover damages in a civil lawsuit...". In Thailand, defamation can result in criminal penalties: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation#Criminal_7 "The Thai Criminal Code provides that: Section 326. Defamation Whoever, imputes anything to the other person before a third person in a manner likely to impair the reputation of such other person or to expose such other person to be hated or scorned, is said to commit defamation, and shall be punished with imprisonment not exceeding one year or fined not exceeding twenty thousand Baht, or both.". One can certainly debate whether defaming someone should result in possible jail time. However, I believe only a madman would argue that defamation shouldn't subject the defamer to any legal consequences.

Though in that movie Anatomy of a Fall, this song was so annoying, it apparently led a woman to murder her husband:

I happened to be listening to the 70s channel on Sirius XM, and this song came on. Has there ever been a more annoying song in this history of mankind?

Defamation is illegal almost everywhere (including the US, Canada, and, I'd venture to guess, all of Europe), as well it should be. You really think it should be OK to spread lies about someone or his business and not have to suffer consequences? Thankfully, very few people think similarly. I have a strong feeling that you'd be quite upset if someone did that to you. Making factually incorrect statements for malicious reasons is, and should be, punishable by law, probably in most, perhaps all, jurisdictions. It has zero to do with freedom of speech, and I suspect you know this.

Actually, hurray for the Thai legal system. These obviously fake reviews were defamatory, malicious, and spiteful, lowering the business's ranking from a stellar 4.9 to a dubious 3.1--all because the restaurant owner didn't allow the Brit free use of the restaurant's private property. I hope the restaurant owner gets compensated fairly. And I hope they're able to track down the source of the other fake reviews, and take action against them as well. Freedom of speech isn't a freedom to lie and defame others.

?? AMLO is the President of the Republic of Mexico.

Another movement we need:

It sounds as though you'd be surprised. I got forcibly fondled and groped by my gym teacher when I was 12. I reported the episode immediately. At my 20-year reunion, I found out he did that with a number of other boys. I obviously understand actors need direction with each scene. My surprise was that a director (especially a female director with a university degree in directing) couldn't take care of it--especially since this was simply an opera with only a few kissing scenes (nothing really intimate). I understand the need in some movies, etc., but--really?--a 19th century Verdi opera?

Not even any relief in Doi Inthanon National Park?

It's easy to lose one's temper in that heat

Haven't I seen him on Only Fans?

Changing what one eats for breakfast won't help any more than any other of those silly activities. 🙄🦄

The AZ vaccine was never approved in the US. To be put in context: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embolic_and_thrombotic_events_after_COVID-19_vaccination "The UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) reporting regards AZD1222 to 3 November 2021, recording 73 deaths out of 425 cases (17%) in the context of 24.9 million first doses administered." The increased risk seems to be seen mainly in women on birth control pills. Of course, the original strain of the virus had much higher risks of blood clots. Now that the virus is no more serious than a regular cold, there seems little reason to use the AZ vaccine (or Janssen), since the Moderna and Pfizer don't seem to have that problem, as low as the risk is.

So no Greecey kitchen... 😉

I enjoyed this ambiguously bisexual movie, though it felt a little long. I guess that the two male leads were pretty good eye candy. I don't know if this movie had an "Intimacy director,"but there were ample sex scenes. I'm curious, if there are any bi or straight men on this forum, an opinion as to whether or not Zendaya is an attractive woman. I would think she'd have to be to play this role, but it seemed to me that she had pretty small tits, and I though that in women, big tits were among the features which most attract straight and bi men. I do have some straight friends, but it would be awkward to ask, as the men are married to other women.

Well, according to that Wikipedia page, these positions are a fairly new development, developed in the aftermath of the Weinstein scandal: "...In October 2018, television network HBO adopted a policy of using intimacy coordinators for all its series and films with intimate scenes. Intimacy coordinators and workshops teaching best practices for intimate scenes began being used in London theaters in 2018. In January 2019, Netflix released Sex Education, its first production that used an intimacy coordinator, Ita O'Brien." They may have just started using them at the LA Opera. It seems especially silly and wasteful to have such people at the opera (these are not exactly racy scenes), but I suppose the function is to shield the director from liability. More $$$ down the drain.

Obviously, I believe collective bargaining is important. I worked hard at my job, and my union never abused their functions.

In my experience, usually the living room, though people go to the kitchen to get a lot of their drinks, especially the refrigerated drinks like coolers.

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. Factually wrong. I was a union member for my entire career (30+ years).

Last week, we attended an LA Opera production of La Traviata, and I noticed in the program a title I've never seen before, "Intimacy Director." Have I just never noticed this before, or is this some kind of new position? I'm not sure what these people are supposed to do. Help only with the kissing scenes? The kissing did seem fine with that performance, but is this really something that the regular directors aren't trained to direct when they go to directing school or whatever? Or is this just wasteful featherbedding? In any case, aren't opera singers usually judged on their singing skills, and maybe acting--but kissing? I've never seen an opera review in which the critic commented on the singer's kissing skills. Here are their LA Opera webpages: https://www.laopera.org/about-us/artists-2/creative-team/sara-widzer/ https://www.laopera.org/about-us/artists-2/creative-team/shawna-lucey/ Is Shawna Lucey somehow a capable director, who somehow lacks the skills to direct intimate scenes? It does look from their webpages that Ms. Widzer has an MM (a Master's degree), whereas Ms. Lucey has only a bachelor's degree. Would directing intimate scenes only be taught in graduate school? If so, why can't Ms. Widzer just do all the directing? Someone correct me if my first impressions are wrong, but this seems like a lot of union bullshit to me.

One man's opinion regarding Asian countries. Probably pretty accurate.