I wonder what the people who support “Sedition Panda” have to say about the “litter boxes in schools” nonsense. I bet they believed it and thought it was horrifying.
The mountain is covered in unrecoverable corpses, trash and literal human shit, it’s deadly, it’s freezing cold, there’s almost no oxygen, and there’s a line to get to the peak once you get there. The only reason to keep this nonsense up is that it gives the Sherpas money they would otherwise not have and they’re poor enough as it is.
Seriously though, why bother even if you love mountain climbing? Sure, it’s the highest point on the planet, but wouldn’t you rather climb something more pristine?
You’re going to have an easier time quitting carrots than you will cannabis, even if you find them both equally pleasant in the moment.
I would suggest that isn’t true for the woman in the link I posted, which was sort of my point about the addictive nature of cannabis. And I would say that physical addiction is not only in the brain because it isn’t your brain that kills you when you go through alcohol or opioid withdrawal.
But sure, you can become heavily dependent on cannabis. I’m just arguing that it’s a totally different sort of dependency and should be classified as such.
Oh fucking great. My daughter’s online school requires her to run “Windows 8 or greater,” but we got her a used laptop that can run 10 to make sure it can keep up with security updates. I don’t even know if it is powerful enough to run 11 because I didn’t even consider the possibility when I bought it. Now we’re going to have to buy a new one in a couple of years?
I have a vague memory of a comedian (Kevin Meaney maybe) talking about his dad asking him if he was “smoking the pot” whenever he said something his dad didn’t understand.
It does show a lack of understanding, but I don’t expect better of them because that’s something that, in general, has been lost to history. It’s just not widely known. Plenty of regular cannabis users still call it marijuana.
Maybe so, but remember, Baldwin was the one who hired her and fired the gun. So he clearly trusted her to know what she was doing. Was that stupid and negligent on his part because of who he hired? Definitely since it was her second job and there were already complaints about her previous job. Was it stupid and negligent on his part because he trusted the idea that the weapons master made the weapon safe? If so, virtually every Hollywood actor given a gun capable of firing real bullets is just as stupid and negligent.
I really don’t think we should start charging actors for crimes when all they were done was handed the gun and told what to do with it, not expecting to cause anyone any harm.
Charge Baldwin with negligence for being a producer, sure. That’s an entirely different issue.