Praetorian_Brow

Rely on yourself then when you are getting conflicting orders because in the end, its your actions that will define the outcome and you will face the consequences. Evidently you have the capacity to understand that such a situation could happen and you asked the question, which infers that you know the answer, but fear it. Doctrine is fluid, as is truth and so are the people who tell us the doctrine, but that doesn't mean we should ignore, just weigh the scales of ethical morality in our own mind. The Nuremburg trials defined to the world that "following orders" was not a good defence when faced with moral and ethical dilemmas. I wonder if Jesus would even attend a LDS service, given that we are so smug about having the "truth", as I am sure some of our doctrine/understanding would be immediately questioned.

Russian economy in trouble Reading that, I had flashbacks as to why Japan attacked the U.S. after the embargoes were put in place. This situation with Russia is escalating too fast.

Documentary on Putin I didn't realize it was that bad, wow. Be very afraid of Russia.

Only I have access to the Emperor, so technically, I have all the power and I won't let you have any.

This is about Black Sea control and Russia influencing the Ukraine away from the West. There is a dual Russian/Ukrainian Naval base within the Ukraine that I am sure annoys Russia and has already been occupied by Russian forces, essentially an invasion, much like what happened in Georgia. Putin sees an opportunity, as did does the ousted ex-president of the Ukraine who is pro Russia and who did an about face in accepting Russian assurances over European assurances. It doesn't take much imagination that the ex president and Putin's interests coincide. It should be a war, as say if Canada was to flood Alaska (its really ours) with troops with no identification but using Canadian army equipment, occupy towns and villages and say it wasn't us, influence a "referendum" to join Canada, then I am sure the U.S. would definitely be angry enough to send Bieber back.

Economics is trust and if I don't know what you own or what I own, how can I trust that my money is actually what I thought it was. That is the problem with debt. Multiply that by trillions, then the foundation of who owes who becomes a question of fear once an institution collapses. Supposedly, banks are backed by governments, but its a pretty silly notion, considering that if the banks go, so does government. I had a conversation with a friend a month or so ago and he was telling me how secure digital currency was and he got irritated with me when I laughed and said no currency is safe from fraud. A few weeks later, guess what, fraud and debt. Bonds, stocks, insurance, leverage, currency, dividends, consolidated debt, the latest idea from the stock exchanges in how to trade magic beans, is still all trust.

Economic freedom is an oxymoron as the former speaks of disparity through gain and the latter implies an environment for self will and if religion is added to that, it becomes a gainful self willed justification of divine right. Just like everything, including political models, theories or suggestions in practice, moderation is best. I agree that debt is the lurking evil that will trump any other arguments when it decides to call in what its owed, but if everyone believes economic freedom is viable, why are we surprised when we all can't have nice things with the irony being that a large percentage of the people with the nice things are calling the shots, but are living life larger than they should, while proclaiming economic freedom for all.

The problem within our religious culture is that to confess about a sin of this nature implies the person is out of control and immediately considered and addict and therefore treated as suspect, which then feeds into the cycle of a person is afraid to come clean, simply because they know they will be shunned. The shunning does far more harm than good, even if there is some kind of poetic justice involved. Outside of our religiously enforced abstinence, pornography use is not considered a major problem immediately when mentioned, simply because there is not a culture of public shaming, self loathing or a feeling of failure. It of course depends on the severity of the problem and its nature, but in the end, making the connection between crack use and someone being afraid to confess to pornography is too much of a stretch as white washing confessions as addictions with the adage that they and the people are all similar is silly. Our social context for perfection, while a notable goal, seems to do a lot of harm for those people seeking to be accepted for who they are and gain social support for their unease. Tough on crime approach seems to make far more criminals than deterring them.

Most people don't understand freedom until someone else tells them they aren't free. Is it truly freedom to wage economic domination, or is it simply something disguised as such to justify any misgivings. Illusion of choice is freedom in some respects, as is voting, but in the end, most people want predictability. Someone invading me or preaching freedom to me in most cases, have a different agenda other than what they speak of.

Elders quorum is very close to what the video illustrated it was. When I get bored in a class, I ask a question in my smooth diplomatic way that ignites debate or observations and most of the time, the teacher is grateful that I do, as reading the manual for everyone is boring as is the cliche answers. Ask some questions! Be prepared for the usual retorts though, as inevitable someone infers that my faith is lacking and that is all that is required, but usually I am rewarded with some surprisings gems as I realize that others are thinking similar to me. Participate!

I had no intention of sparking anything or defaming someones character. It was an observation that occurred to me but I suppose this thread is an obvious illustration of the original poster's intent and how quickly threads can lose context. I honestly don't think a consensus or spirit of total cooperation can be attained on a forum though, as its very purpose is to foster debate and examine issues, which leads to a protracted opinionated war of attrition for those who believe they have a vested interest. Of course, we should maintain civility and my sarcasm and dead pan humour does not communicate well, but even I can allow the satisfaction of someone having the last word.

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/233432.pdf The study by the Justice Department that is linked above makes the case that Tasers when used "properly" are safe. However, the study notes that high stress, environmental factors can lead to a cascade effect, that can lead to injury, which is ironic considering that when won't a Taser be used in a stressful situation. Falling, landing hard, that sort of thing. As the darts are 9mm, they can perforate skin as designed, but if they hit vital exposed areas such as throat or eyes, then the injury could be lethal. I would prefer law enforcement to use tasers before guns and appreciate they have an alternative that is less lethal, however reports seem to encourage the idea that officers are far too quick to deploy tasers simply out of convenience. Escalation of suitable force needs to be paramount, but as always, it usually comes down to the officer's training and ability to de-escalate the situation. Abuse of tasers can dramatically increase the possibility of death, as the study notes. Continuous shocking or multiple hits outside the guidelines can happen. Either way, I consider them an improvement over firearms, but they do need to be considered one of the last methods when all less dangerous options have been exhausted.

Joke or not, mentioning a taser online to inspire fear makes me wonder what you are like on the job.

I think I was 4 or 5 when I realized they gave out packs of gum into those advertising envelopes. Eat my pack and decided that I wanted more, so I went down the street committing mail theft. I didn't see it as theft, just solving a problem I had.

Some conditions are incurable and its unrealistic to expect otherwise as that puts dangerous assumptions in place.