Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
It doesn't show where the officer and the suspect were involved in a tussle as claimed by the officer, during which the suspect reportedly took the officer's stun gun.
If we're still talking about the officer Michael T. Slager case (I'm so
Not disputing your point about videos not showing the entire context though!
But at least insurance does provide some way to incentivise manufacturers to improve repairability... in theory anyway. However, I believe cars are increasingly brought on credit with bundled insurance, so maybe that's how they deal with it?
Being as it hails from Dallas, I'd assume they tried patenting XOR as a security method and then trolling every equally incompetent "data security" company they could think of before deciding to hack their own one together?!
They've known about the problem since September and still haven't fixed it? If they were a private company they'd be out of business by now.
Also, only since September? Maybe they mean September 2009 or something?
I do not know about New York, but if you take an Uber car and get into an accident, do not count on the driver's insurance. It was invalidated the second you got in the car, having promised to pay him.
Don't know the specifics of the case, but Yellow Cab in Chicago have filed for bankruptcy because they are presumably unable to pay damages to a customer who was injured in a crash.
There must be a bit more detail to it, because I would have expected Yellow Cabs insurance to cover it... but just goes to show... something!
His name is public however because it is in the public interest.
I'd like you to back this up with reason, please. The justice system has its hooks in here. Punishment is in their dominion, not yours or mine. So. Exactly how does it benefit the public to further drag his name, address, family, future etc., through the mud?
Someone is found guilty of a crime, it's in the public interest to be aware of this. The justice system in (in theory) operating on behalf of society. So the news media report such things.
I'm struggling to understand why you feel this is wrong. Is there a circumstance (other than this one) where it would make sense to keep the identity of a guilty party secret?
The thing I find strange/funny is that he must surely have learned a bit about what can and can't be made public whilst trying to defend himself, and yet... he hasn't, has he?
So on top of being a social low-life parasite, he's a stupid social low-life parasite. Double whammy!