Try reading some old dragnet scripts for a feel of what it used to be like.

I think they used "citizens" sometimes in the bits before the show talking about the city and more often they used "people" but also used "the public" and "man" and "woman".
I don't recall "civilian" being used.

http://www.otrr.org/FILES/Scri...

There's a blog from 2009 about this
http://pl.atyp.us/wordpress/in...

It looks like the international definition of civilians includes police officers. ("A civilian under international humanitarian law (also known as the laws of war) is a person who is not a member of his or her countryâ(TM)s armed forces or other militia. Civilians are distinct from combatants." )

I've been unable to google when the police started using "civilian" widely. Most states still advertise for "civilian police force" jobs. So the police are explicitly civilian in the state's eyes.

They are out protesting in large numbers because the video evidence of the obvious unwarranted and undeserved death motivated them more than simple hearsay.

The police department is changing its training policies as a result. The police department lost a lot of political capital even tho the two police officers were nobilled.

The city and the police department are spending a lot of extra money and going thru a lot of unpleasant times because of the video which will hopefully encourage them to be more careful next time they might want to illegally choke someone to death.

And two officers may have been killed* which is really terrible. But hopefully the police will work on community relations to regain the trust and support of the citizens.

*Or it may have just been a whacko who would have shot the police officers anyway.

Do you realize that american police officers kill united states citizens at over 50x the rate UK and German police officers kill their citizens?

Do you realize that american police officers kill more children each year (including 7 year old girls) than UK and german police officers kill all citizens (including adults) combined? And basically at an infinitely higher rate.

United states police have reported* killing over 400 citizens per year since 9/11. Meanwhile, germany and uk have killed reported killing under 4 citizens per year in the same time period.

*United states police forces are NOT required to report citizens killed and many do not so the actual number of citizens killed in the united states is higher than reported.

Go back a little before that and the average temperature was 12c higher than now for hundreds of millions of years at a time.

http://geology.utah.gov/survey...

http://geology.utah.gov/survey...

Basically, we are still in the middle of an ice age that peaked 20k years ago and started about 65 million years ago.

In farenheit terms- we average 58 degrees globally today (and rising) and we averaged 72 degrees globally from 65 million years ago to 185 million years ago.

The largest place I see ei playing out is in things in limited quantity.

Most the population is being priced out of things which used to be generally free or affordable.

In texas, the beaches were always free but now some stretches are being locked up. On the east coast, large stretches of beach are "private".

Amusement parks are grossly over crowded but if you have money (5x the standard price), you don't have a line.

Collectables that used to be affordable if you saved up are now going for more than your entire life income because when a person has a billion dollars they can afford to drop a million dollars on a comic book.

Likewise, there are private ski resorts, special "extra money" ski privileges in areas that used to be affordable to all and equally open to all.

Likewise for the front rows at concerts, opening nights for shows.

When the wealthiest made 52x what the rest did, their spending was constrained. They could have anything but they couldn't have everything. Now at 350x to 452x, they can pretty much have everything special and unique.

The balance of wealth between the richest and poorest in society determines how we share rare things in our society. Currently, we've reached a point where the richest get everything and even the "non-rich" get a lot less than they did in the past.

I agree completely.

Russia has a long heritage of eating up invaders. I think it is solid and will be stable as a state.

It has a problem with crony capitalism and it's first attempt to throw off fascism failed. But I think it will eventually gain the same corrupted kind of hybrid self government the rest of the world has. Essentially, the people will have some actual say in local, territorial, and national government while the corporations will have too much sway.

But the russian people must become intolerant of corruption. Bribery and graft are tolerable in small doses but they destroy your economy and your government when they become an accepted way of doing business.

I wish russia and the russian people success in getting over this obstacle on their path to being a modern state with relatively free people and less hostility and phobia of other countries.

And seriously- any attempt by china to take over russia would be the largest mistake they ever made.

Don't like Canada? What's wrong with it? Its's beautiful, it's rich, it's got huge... tracts of land.

Most of their products are "nice to haves" not "must haves".

Do I need a new TV when mine isn't broken? Nope.
Do I need a new computer this year instead of two or three years from now? Not really.

Meanwhile, the loss of income would be immediate and lead to social unrest which they really try hard to avoid.

Wish I could mod you up.

Informative, interesting, insightful.

And even more lens flare?

From what I recall, notch splits the 2.5 billion with 2 other people and his share is about 70%. I can't find a citation right now (grr) but pretty sure I read it back in september.

I was also happy to hear that he shared 3 million dollars with the 25 mojang employees. It is nice when a business owner that sales the business shares something with the employees who made the business a success.

From what the articles have said, part of the reason he sold was he couldn't take the stress and fan anger directed at him (as the company figure head for things he didn't personally have a hand in) made him really unhappy.

The water fountains could be done with the new particle effects.

It's a nice creative build.

When the police stop killing 7 year old black girls.
And when the police stop killing blacks at 2x the rate of whites.
And when police stop pulling over blacks at over 5x the rate they pull over whites
And when police stop pulling the white girls in mixed groups aside- calling their parents to come pick them up so there is no arrest warrant AND THEN telling the black girls in the group that "the trash goes in back"
And when judges and juries stop sentencing blacks to longer sentences than other groups for the same offenses...

Then the crap you are trying to sell will be valid.

Can blacks succeed in america? Yes.

Is it MUCH harder than it should be for them because of massive and systemic racism? Absolutely.

Whites do well given unequal schooling, unequal job opportunity, unequal law enforcement, a larger "old boy" network holding a disproportional portion of the plum positions and passing them down to their children, etc. etc.

The days of white privilege are still slowly ending and they will probably continue slowly end for at least another 40 years.

Because apple may have problems selling their devices when the public is informed of the horrific abuses (deaths, suicide, maiming, cancer) involved in their pretty products.

When opens users of iphones up to comments from others about how evil their phones are and how could they buy a phone built with such evil methods. And when they are made to think about how evil the build process is- some of them feel uncomfortable.

And because apple builds enough of the devices that it can be identified by reporters unlike many other essentially anonymous unknown products that are less famous.

I think you would agree that if a farmer is 20 miles from any other connection point that no company or municipality should be legally required to run that farmer a line and charge the same price as they do for a line in an urban neighborhood.

If we decide that we want to provide that as the federal government- cool. Tho it would be pretty damn irritating to find we are running subsidized internet out to some wealthy lady's wilderness estate because she put in 10 acres of hay.

There are alternative solutions (like satellite) but they are more expensive. And that's the trade off you get for living away from other people. You can't share services and costs. You don't pay city taxes.

Everything we decide to do is a trade off. Alaskan Fishermen who are maimed and even killed while fishing for us don't get inexpensive high speed internet either. Neither do game wardens living in remote lodges in national parks. And we don't provide any of them the same level of police, fire, and water service either.

It's not a question of saying they do or do not deserve it. It's prioritization of limited resources. Do you run high speed internet to Fred the Farmer for $20,000 or do you pave a street or buy a new fire engine or buy the new police cruiser?

Especially when changes in technology may allow Fred the farmer to have high speed internet for $120 a month in a couple years.

But if we had unlimited resources- sure. Give the farmer's high speed internet with no extra charge for the extra hardware they require.