This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Topics - Flee
« on: March 14, 2019, 07:59:56 PM »
This is in my opinion one of the major questions regarding human rights. I asked Banjo on Discord but he proved unhelpful so I'm putting it out there for all.
For those unfamiliar with the term, abuse of rights clauses are essentially exceptions to human rights when they would be (mis)used to undermine any of the other freedoms. In other words, someone cannot invoke protection of his own rights when he's exercising them solely to destroy rights for others.
A notable example can be found in article 17 of the ECHR, which states that "Nothing in this Convention may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the Convention."
An example of this would be someone using his right to free speech to rile people up towards destroying our fundamentals of democracy or taking away rights of others (such as fair trial, equality, privacy, assembly...). Under the abuse of rights clause, he would not be able to rely on his protection of free speech if he would be sanctioned for his behavior.
« on: February 26, 2019, 03:36:16 PM »
Title says it all. This has been on my mind after reading Kernel's thread about how he'd struggle to afford $700 to register his truck. As you might know, this isn't uncommon at all. Some reports
have found that over 60% of Americans are unable to cover unexpected costs or emergencies of over a thousand dollars, which is pretty staggering. I looked it up for my own country as well and found that those numbers are far lower (around 20%) but still too high not to be cause for concern.
So I figured I'd ask you guys the same. If you had to pay $500 for some unforseen circumstances (medical costs, home repairs, unexpected bills, loss of a job...), would you struggle doing so? What about $1000? $5000? $10,000? If not, how do you think you'd manage? Ask family / friends to lend you the money, take out a loan, sell some things, take on a second job, dig into your savings?
« on: February 01, 2019, 10:40:53 AM »
Friendship ended with UK. Japan is our new best friend now.
No tarrifs or trade restrictions between the EU and Japan anymore. Free import of all Japanese stuff and big boosts for trade in Europe, and vice versa. Export of European values, labor standards and human rights measures to Asia.
Fuck I love the EU. I feel bad for the UK now.
« on: January 19, 2019, 04:02:09 PM »
Game's alright so far, but:
- weapon degradation is a horrible mechanic.
- menu management and swapping stuff is awful (which doesn't help since you've got all the cooking and whatnot to do)
- fighting monsters already feels like a chore 3 hours in because they'll just respawn, you won't get anything good from them anyways, and you'll just break your weapons doing so
- stamina runs out way too quickly (I imagine this well get better later on but it's still a pain)
- exploration so far doesn't feel like it's been terribly rewarding
- abilities have felt underwhelming outside of the dedicated shrines
That said, the game looks good and the tech is pretty solid. Nowhere near a GOAT game though. Early impressions are a 7, maybe 8 out of 10.
« on: January 14, 2019, 12:47:07 PM »
Went to look for Fedorekd, couldn't find him. 2/10 city.
« on: December 23, 2018, 04:21:17 PM »
Been a while since we've done of these and I just put together my second PC so I figured I'd start one. Post pics and list specs and details while you're at it, or give feedback to whoever.
The room is still pretty bare and needs more decorating but it's function over form for now. It's basically my attic room right underneath the roof with the other stuff and consoles in the main living room downstairs. Another proper office chair and monitor (144hz) to go next to the laptop are on their way. There's two computers for a dual PC setup to stream with (one PC to run the game, the other to do the encoding and streaming) with a gtx 1080 / i7 7700k / 16GB 3200mhz RAM / 970 Evo m.2 SSD in one and a gtx 1070ti / Ryzen 2700x / 16 GB 3000mhz RAM / 860 Evo SSD in the other. The screens are an Asus 144hz 1ms one for most games and an LG Ultrawide for other stuff. Sennheiser headphones, Logitech mouse (G403), keyboard (G810) and webcam (920 HD). Some noise cancelling foam on the wall to improve quality on the Blue Snowball mic.
The three current gen consoles (Switch, Xbox One and PS4) on a Sony Bravia TV. The games themselves and things like my Quake stuff are off-picture. Got a custom piece of Dark Souls art and things like that around the place.
I've also got this Elgato green screen to chroma key out the background. Really cool and collapsible screen to chroma key out the background of the cam.
« on: December 21, 2018, 08:04:06 PM »
This might be the first Steam sale I'll actually buy a few things. Currently thinking of picking up:
- Hitman 1-2
- Far Cry 5
- Borderlands 2 + Pre-Sequel
- Rainbow Six
- AC Origins / Odyssey
- GTA V
- Shadow of Tomb Raider
- Wolfenstein 2
- Arkham series
« on: November 10, 2018, 05:57:42 AM »
I'm putting together a second computer for a dual PC setup for streaming and whatnot. It'll also be used for gaming (primarily by the girlfriend). Currently thinking of putting a Ryzen 2700x and GTX 1070 in it, but I'm also tempted to just turn it into the new main PC with a 8700k and 1080ti or so. Thoughts for streaming and whatnot?
« on: November 10, 2018, 05:56:09 AM »
My little brother is graduating from Top Gun so I'm going to Texas. What do I even do there?
« on: November 01, 2018, 11:53:28 PM »
Going to start my own .ltd company soon. I'm keeping my current job since I want that PhD before anything else but I think it's worth it for the additional esports talent/casting and legal counsel I do.
Anyone's got any experience with or advice on this? Also, suggest names for Flee.ltd.
« on: October 19, 2018, 04:03:07 PM »
Every time you think this man can't stoop any lower, he somehow does. And all while he's refusing to take action against a man living in America being killed for reporting on Saudi human rights abuses and corruption. Pathetic.
We've been heading towards this moment for a long time. Donald Trump, American president, has for years endorsed violence from the rally podium, encouraging his supporters to punch protesters in the face and offering to pay their legal bills. Trump has long demonized the free press as The Enemy of the People, and described journalists in dehumanizing terms like "scum." He has blithely suggested he "hates these people"—reporters—but "would never kill them," a disgusting way to put the idea on the table.
So it was inevitable that we would arrive here. This week, his White House was reportedly working with the government of Saudi Arabia to absolve Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of involvement in the disappearance and reported murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, who is a U.S. resident. On Thursday night, Trump took the stage for a rally in Montana and put a bloody icing on the cake.
The President of the United States just praised his political ally for assaulting a member of the press, the same week that president's possible role in covering up the murder of a green-card-holding journalist comes under serious examination. (It was not enough that Trump may be covering for the Saudis because of his business interests, a conflict that would put him in violation of the Constitution and his oath of office.) Trump is referencing the incident where Congressman Greg Gianforte of Montana body-slammed a Guardian reporter, Ben Jacobs, the night before he won a special election to his seat last year. Gianforte was charged with assault and pled guilty to a misdemeanor.
« on: October 03, 2018, 02:05:52 PM »
Recommend them. I just got a 2DS XL. Pokemon supersun and megamoon are the only ones that come to mind.
« on: September 20, 2018, 02:56:28 PM »
Long story short, I apparently impressed people at a conference and have since been approached by a British consultacy firm with a job offer. They want me work for them as an independent legal expert for research projects and R&D on artificial intelligence. I would't have to move or quit my current job as I'd only be working for them a limited amount of hours a month on the weekends / in the evenings where necessary. On the one hand, I'm really not looking for more work and less free time. On the other, these people have made me a very enticing offer and would compensate me more than generously for my work. As in a weekend of my time would net me more than what most people make in a month. Thing is that my financial situation is good as it is so I don't really need the extra income. It would be nice and a good mark on my resume for the future, but it's definitely not necessary.
What would you do?
« on: September 14, 2018, 05:29:25 AM »
No it didn't. Don't be dumb.
« on: September 09, 2018, 05:40:14 AM »
Anyone playing the beta? Put a few hours into it so far and it seems like a very solid game. Might even get it some time in the future.
« on: August 29, 2018, 01:54:18 AM »
I never realized this wasn't common knowledge. If you didn't already know, you do now.
« on: August 10, 2018, 08:51:45 AM »
The moment you've all been waiting for is finally here. The main esports event of the year is upon us and it's shaping up to be glorious.
First things first, the Bethesda keynote is happening in just over 2 hours. There will be a DOOM Eternal gameplay reveal as well as more details on Quake Champions, Rage 2 and probably the new Wolfenstein game as well. Link your Bethesda account to your Twitch account and tune in over at twitch.tv/Bethesda for the keynote. A little bit later, head over to twitch.tv/quake for the start of the 2v2 Quake tournament.
« on: July 19, 2018, 11:53:12 AM »
"New research measuring the importance of religion in 109 countries spanning the entire 20th century has reignited an age-old debate around the link between secularisation and economic growth. The study, published in Science Advances, has shown that a decline in religion influences a country's future economic prosperity.
The findings revealed that secularisation precedes economic development and not the other way around. Although this does not demonstrate a causal pathway, it does rule out the reverse.
Furthermore, the findings show that secularisation only predicts future economic development when it is accompanied by a respect and tolerance for individual rights. Countries where abortion, divorce and homosexuality are tolerated have a greater chance of future economic prosperity."
Source: Bristol University
Makes a lot of sense but nice to see research underpinning it too.
« on: July 19, 2018, 03:07:03 AM »
Pretty good overview of the recent Trump insanity.
"Two weeks before his inauguration, Donald J. Trump was shown highly classified intelligence indicating that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia had personally ordered complex cyberattacks to sway the 2016 American election.
The evidence included texts and emails from Russian military officers and information gleaned from a top-secret source close to Mr. Putin, who had described to the C.I.A. how the Kremlin decided to execute its campaign of hacking and disinformation.
Mr. Trump sounded grudgingly convinced, according to several people who attended the intelligence briefing. But ever since, Mr. Trump has tried to cloud the very clear findings that he received on Jan. 6, 2017, which his own intelligence leaders have unanimously endorsed."
The amount of mental gymnastics or just downright stupidity people must have to still support this man is just crazy.
« on: July 09, 2018, 01:38:43 PM »
In the past few days, most of it in just 24 hours:
>Boris Johnson, the UK Foreign Secretary
, resigns over Brexit and states concerns that the UK is headed "for the status of a colony".
>David Davis, the UK Minister for Brexit
, resigns as the country is shaping up to "hand control" over to the EU regarding much of the economy and other areas.
>Steve Baker, the no.2 responsible for Brexit
, has resigned as he feels his department is being blindsided and the UK is put in a weak negotiating position.
>British Finance Investments dropped 26% in a year
while France and Germany soared.
>Latest revealed version of Brexit plan
would not allow flexible deviation from EU rules to set up new service/trade agreements with the US.
Marvelous. A political decision rivaled in insanity and folly only by Trump's election is going swimmingly.
STRONG AND STABLE, or something.
« on: June 29, 2018, 04:31:12 AM »
« on: June 28, 2018, 09:47:07 AM »
Independent journalism and alternative news is something I've seen a lot of people rave about recently. With many deriding the mainstream media (MSM) for various reasons, I've been looking into some of these alternative sources myself. Unfortunately, I haven't warmed up to them much and remain unconvinced of their value over other sources of information. In short, I have three main issues with them.
1. They are independent only in the most narrow sense of the word. They may not be part of an association or work with an editorial board, but this doesn't mean they're free from external influence whatsoever. I'd even say they're more affected by (peer) pressure and coutsider leverage than traditional sources of media. Independent or alternative does not mean they're neutral, objective or fair, and much of this has to do with how important community support is for them.
They are fully paid by their viewers/readers and supporters on sites like Patreon. If people don't click, comment and donate, they will not be able to pay their bills or continue doing this. And most of their community does not follow their content because they're interested in neutral and factual reporting. They're not watching to be challenged, countered or get a nuanced view. They watch because they want to be validated. They want their preconceptions to be confirmed, see that there's thousands like them and have a charismatic and seemingly knowledgable person affirm their views on certain topics.
And that's something that creates a vicious cycle in which these personalities can't really go against what their community expects. They don't want fair. They want a slamdown of the opposition. A Youtuber that amassed a following with videos on anti-feminism, anti-immigration, anti-globalism, anti-PC/SJW, anti-welfare, pro-populism, pro-gun... can't make videos that go against this narrative because it will hurt their income. This is apparent everywhere. A big independent journalist is Tim Pool. I went through his stuff a while ago and in one of his older videos he received quite a few downvotes and plenty of upset comments. Why? Because he said something good about what his audience thinks should be bad. While his videos often seem reasonable, they're very leading and meant to foster a much more radical and vile community - something he must be well aware of. He can get away with diverging a few times, sure, but if he suddenly changes his tune and produces content that doesn't continue a very clear and often slanted narrative of anti-leftism, anti-establishment, anti-MSM and so on, his supporters will no doubt be quick to drop him and move elsewhere as soon as they feel they lost their ally.
So while they are independent in the strictest sense, these outlets are very vulnerable to external influence and often have little to no choice but to continue covering specific topics from a specific angle to feed an established narrative that will be supported by their community. As we're moving further away from the center and closer to the extremes, this is very detrimental to the reliability, accuracy and quality of their content.
2. Their lack of accountability. Like it or not, but the traditional media do have pretty good mechanisms in place to stop abuse. Editorial boards, review procedures, protection of sources, codes of conduct and standards of journalistic integrity, press boards, media watchdogs, procedures to file complaints... Of course, the media still messes up. But more often than not you'll see people being held accountable. Articles will be retracted or corrected in light of new information, apologies will be issued, and certain standards of quality reporting are often enforced. The people employed are usually trained writers and journalists who have received training on doing research and applying right methodologies. Yet in the alternative media, none of that really exists. Fake news will go unchallenged, incorrect information doesn't get amended, there's no sanctions for abuse, no standards of integrity, no nothing stopping anyone from jumping the gun... It's against their interests to do anything like that. You're not going to remove a popular youtube video making you money every day because you made a mistake, nor are you going to take accountability when something incorrect still achieves the desired purpose, puts your name out there and garners community support. And that too should seriously worry anyone who cares about the truth.
3. The often low quality of the content. As a result of the first two points, the actual information they put out is often highly slanted. Positions to the opposite are ignored or underrepresented. Points are often cherrypicked and made with lacking knowledge on a certain topic. Leading questions, thumbnails and titles frame the media from start to finish ("now I'm not saying it's like this, buuuut I'm just suggestively asking loaded questions"). Sources are often missing or of really low quality. Covering the recent Tommy Robinson news, should I involve a legal expert from the UK who actually knows what they're talking about (as several legal blogs covered in great detail) or should I get an American MAGA activist and lawyer who supported Tommy and has no expertise on this topic on the show? Hmm... Covering the topic of gun control, should I get some knowledgable criminologists on here or should I instead feature a gun owner fighting against gun policy, an NRA instructor and a pro-gun youtuber with the other side being represented only by selected street interviews at a march of ignorant people. The answer is pretty clear. Your viewers want metaphorical blood, they don't want someone knowledgable going against the narrative. They want to laugh at some random girl saying all assault rifle 100 magazine round ghost guns should be banned, not have an actual expert provide them with research and hard facts on how the most comprehensive study in history just found very strong evidence in favor of certain types of gun control. They want the MAGA man lament the horrors of Robinson, not a specialized UK lawyer explaining the actual proceedings and confirm that he did get a lawyer and trial and wasn't placed on what amounts to death row. And so that's what you give them.
tl;dr independent / alternative news is by and large unreliable. The lack of accountability, the extremely selective coverage of topics, the strong financial need to satisfy the direct supporters with a clear and biased narrative, and the often low quality and massively slanted reporting of topics are some of the main issues I see. The traditional mainstream media remains the better source of information by an enormous margin. While all news should be taken with a grain of salt, the alternative sources require a lot more than just a single grain.
Interested in your thoughts since I know there's several people here who follow these outlets.
« on: May 24, 2018, 11:28:07 AM »
« on: April 28, 2018, 01:09:30 PM »
Ok, going to watch Infinity War. People are saying it's dark so it might actually be a good Marvel superhero movie. What movies do I need to watch beforehand? I've probably seen most already, like Ultron and the first Avengers. I just saw Civil War last night and already watched Black Panther some other time. Do I need to watch Homecoming? Doesn't look interesting at all. Can I just do Thor Ragnarok and be ready?
Also wtf is the deal with Black Widow. Hands down the most annoying character so far. I'm fine with the others but she has literally no interesting powers other than punching people or being sneaky and she doesn't even do that very well. Archer even kicked her ass pretty much. It got annoying during Civil War how often fully armed trained military guys decided that the best course of action was to get within arm's length of her to shoot her or something.
Also Cap getting it on with the little niece of his old girl? Damn, dude just goes for it.
« on: April 07, 2018, 09:48:23 PM »
Are there any skeptic channels that are actually good? I've come across quite a few and they have almost all been little more than excuses for thinly veiled (and often pretty far) right wing personalities pushing a very clear narrative with very little actual skepticism but instead just a lot of slanted, misleading and cherrypicked points under the false pretense of being truthful/rational/logical/intellectual to demonize others (the progressives/leftists/SJWs/marxists/millenials/whatever/alloftheabove) and get their base riled up. So are there any out there that are actually worth watching and apply some academic rigor and nuance?
« on: March 23, 2018, 09:23:12 PM »
: Cambridge Analytica's blueprint for Trump victory
The blueprint for how Cambridge Analytica claimed to have won the White House for Donald Trump by using Google, Snapchat, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube is revealed for the first time in an internal company document obtained by the Guardian.
The 27-page presentation was produced by the Cambridge Analytica officials who worked most closely on Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.
A former employee explained to the Guardian how it details the techniques used by the Trump campaign to micro-target US voters with carefully tailored messages about the Republican nominee across digital channels.
Intensive survey research, data modelling and performance-optimising algorithms were used to target 10,000 different ads to different audiences in the months leading up to the election. The ads were viewed billions of times, according to the presentation.
Mark Zuckerberg apologises for Facebook's 'mistakes' over Cambridge Analytica
The document was presented to Cambridge Analytica employees in London, New York and Washington DC weeks after Trump’s victory, providing an insight into how the controversial firm helped pull off one of the most dramatic political upsets in modern history.
“This is the debrief of the data-driven digital campaign that was employed for Mr Trump,” said Brittany Kaiser, 30, who was Cambridge Analytica’s business development director until two weeks ago, when she left over a contractual dispute.
She is the second former employee to come forward in less than a week, talking exclusively to the Guardian about the inner workings of the firm, including the work she said it conducted on the UK’s EU membership referendum.
She said she had access to a copy of the same document now obtained by the Guardian, and had used it to showcase the campaign’s secret methods to potential clients of Cambridge Analytica.
Despite the advances made in data-led political campaigning, these were techniques that, according to the presentation, Trump did not have access to when Cambridge Analytica joined his campaign in early June 2016.
The Republican nominee, who had just secured sufficient delegates to become the party’s candidate, still had “no speakable data infrastructure” and “no unifying data, digital and tech strategy”, the document states.
The entire article is definitely worth reading. Especially disturbing is stuff like this. First, control people's first impression by framing the search and topic in a slanted and leading way to make them susceptible to your message ("we have a problem with jobs"). Then, turn it around and go full offensive by posting misleading information and fake news to slander the opposition ("Clinton is a warmonger and supports abandoning American jobs"). Finally, suppress content that opposes your narrative and direct the readers to your side ("Trump's plan to save American jobs"). Millions of people were manipulated by this kind of BS and just roped into putting on blinds to eat up slanted information supporting their initial biases and trying to hide information to the contrary. Insane.
« on: March 23, 2018, 01:17:46 PM »
A man who filmed a pet dog giving Nazi salutes before putting the footage on YouTube has been convicted of committing a hate crime. Mark Meechan, 30, recorded his girlfriend's pug, Buddha, responding to statements such as "gas the Jews" and "Sieg Heil" by raising its paw. But police were alerted and he was arrested for allegedly committing a hate crime. The original clip had been viewed more than three million times on YouTube.
Meechan, of Coatbridge, Lanarkshire, went on trial at Airdrie Sheriff Court where he denied any wrong doing.
He insisted he made the video, which was posted in April 2016, to annoy his girlfriend Suzanne Kelly, 29. But Sheriff Derek O'Carroll found him guilty of a charge under the Communications Act that he posted a video on social media and YouTube which was grossly offensive because it was "anti-semitic and racist in nature" and was aggravated by religious prejudice. Sheriff O'Carroll told the court he did not believe Meechan had made the video only to annoy his girlfriend and ruled it was anti-Semitic.
He also said he believed Meechan - who was supported at court by Tommy Robinson, former leader of far-right group the English Defence League (EDL) - left the video on YouTube to drive traffic to other material he had on there. He added: "In my view it is a reasonable conclusion that the video is grossly offensive. "The description of the video as humorous is no magic wand. "This court has taken the freedom of expression into consideration. "But the right to freedom of expression also comes with responsibility."
Sheriff O'Carroll said Meehan was "quite obviously an intelligent and articulate man". But he added: "The accused knew that the material was offensive and knew why it was offensive. "Despite that the accused made a video containing anti-Semitic content and he would have known it was grossly offensive to many Jewish people."
Ross Brown, defending, said Meechan had only intended the video to be seen by a small group of friends and to annoy his girlfriend. He said the material had been leaked and gone viral but Police Scotland then wrongly pursued Meechan despite his later videos attempting to "set the record straight".
Mr Brown said: "His girlfriend testified that Mr Meechan had never made known to her any anti-Semitic views whatsoever. "The accused possesses both tolerant and liberal views. "His girlfriend is in no doubt it was an example of his sense of humour."
Shameful judgement. Not a fan of the guy but this is undue.
« on: March 02, 2018, 01:36:11 PM »
First things first, Donny is actually backing some gun control. Of course, he's as vague as always and doesn't say much of substance, but props to him for at least trying and making comments against the NRA.NY Times
- Trump Stuns Lawmakers With Seeming Embrace of Comprehensive Gun Control
WASHINGTON — President Trump stunned Republicans on live television Wednesday by embracing gun control and urging a group of lawmakers at the White House to resurrect gun safety legislation that has been opposed for years by the powerful National Rifle Association and the vast majority of his party.
In a remarkable meeting, the president veered wildly from the N.R.A. playbook in front of giddy Democrats and stone-faced Republicans. He called for comprehensive gun control legislation that would expand background checks to weapons purchased at gun shows and on the internet, keep guns from mentally ill people, secure schools and restrict gun sales for some young adults. He even suggested a conversation on an assault weapons ban.
At one point, Mr. Trump suggested that law enforcement authorities should have the power to seize guns from mentally ill people or others who could present a danger without first going to court. “I like taking the guns early,” he said, adding, “Take the guns first, go through due process second.”
The declarations prompted a frantic series of calls from N.R.A. lobbyists to their allies on Capitol Hill and a statement from the group calling the ideas that Mr. Trump expressed “bad policy.” Republican lawmakers suggested to reporters that they remained opposed to gun control measures.
Not only has this left his subreddit temporarily in shambles
(dozens of T_D veterans have been banned just for quoting what Trump said but remember guys, it's the leftists who are emotional snowflakes and can't deal with facts over feelings or something), but it's amazing how the same people supporting him now would've called for little less than public lynchings had Obama ever said that guns should just be taken when seemingly a good idea to the police involved. That said though, bad Donny for bailing on due process.
has just concluded another massive and lengthy study on the topic of gun control.
Passing an assault weapons ban might prevent 170 mass shooting deaths a year in the US, experts who support gun control estimate. Passing a universal background check law could prevent 1,100 gun homicides each year. Raising the age limit for buying firearms could prevent 1,600 homicides and suicides.
These are some of the new estimates in a groundbreaking study of the potential impact of American gun control laws. The non-partisan analysis, based on a review of existing gun policy research and a survey of the best guesses of both gun rights and gun control experts, was conducted by the Rand Corporation, which spent two years and more than $1m on the project.
The research is further explained here
, but it can basically be summed up as "many types of gun control work, they're proven to be effective at saving lives and reducing crime, and it would do a lot of good if it would be expanded in the US". It also states something that I've been saying for years, namely that there's a dire need for a lot more research on American gun violence and the impact of gun control rules, as much is still unknown and there isn't a lot of evidence either way when it comes to some aspects of it. Unfortunately, there still exist budgetary restrictions on what some of the best equipped institutions like the CDC can do in terms of gun research (for those who don't know, the CDC came out with some very factual reporting in the 90's but because it spelled bad news for the gun lobby they've since been limited from researching gun violence because that's the right thing to do or something), so that's a pretty big shame. This isn't very surprising as the amount of evidence in favor of this has been growing for years, but it's always interesting to see these kinds of huge studies from excellent institutions confirm it even more.
« on: February 14, 2018, 06:59:44 PM »
At least 17 people were killed Wednesday in a high school shooting in Parkland, Florida, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel said.Guardian
The suspect, 19-year-old former student Nikolaus Cruz, is in custody, the sheriff said. The sheriff said he was expelled for unspecified disciplinary reasons. Police are investigating his digital profile, he said. So far, what they've found is "very, very disturbing," Israel said.
Law enforcement responded to reports of a shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shortly before 3 p.m.
Seventeen people, including the suspect, were sent to area hospitals, said Dr. Evan Boyar of Broward Health. The suspect was treated and released to police. The victims included students and adults, the sheriff said. Twelve were killed inside the building and two died outside, he said. One died in the street and two died at the hospital, Israel said.
Seventeen people were confirmed dead as the United States endured another horrifying school shooting at the hands of a teenage gunman armed with an AR-15 assault rifle.
Twelve people died inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school in Parkland, Florida. Two more died just outside the building, one more died in a nearby street and two more victims died in hospital, a Broward County sheriff confirmed.
After initial reports of a shooter, officers surrounded the campus, directing the evacuation of hundreds of students from the scene, while other teens hid inside closets and under desks to stay safe. Students later told reporters that they at first thought alarms in the school were a fire drill, until they heard gunshots in the hallways.
As first reports emerged, deputies of the Broward County sheriff’s department said the high school was on a “code red” lockdown. The department said there were “at least 14 victims” being taken to a local hospital and medical center, although it was not clear from the statement whether any of them were fatally injured.
However, by 6.30pm local time, police sheriff Scott Israel confirmed the grim news: “It’s a horrific, horrific day. My triplets attended this school, and it’s horrible, just horrible.”
Medical staff confirmed a total of 17 patients had been taken to three hospitals - two patients died, at least three more were in critical condition. The suspect was treated and released into police custody.
Sheriff Israel identified the killer as 19-year-old Nikolas Cruz, who was in custody. Israel said Cruz had been “expelled for disciplinary reasons”. (The sheriff’s office had previously released incorrect spellings of his name.)
Israel said: “He had countless magazines, multiple magazines. One AR-15. I do not know if he had a second.”
« on: February 08, 2018, 09:41:05 AM »
"Russian Iron Man: Russia's Special Forces soldier and Kosovo war veteran fights debt collectors wearing exoskeleton, gets pardoned.
... However, the one item deserving the most attention is Maltsev’s homemade exoskeleton that earned him the nickname 'Russian Iron Man'.
Maltsev welded the exoskeleton using titanium alloy and reinforcing rods and mounted a helmet on top. He made it so it could be outfitted with a bullet-proof vest. Once, Maltsev armed with the Saiga even chased a debt collector through the yard for all neighbors to see, according to the attorney."