yeah you didn't do it in two hours did you twat

10km with 2hrs, fucking slow. 10km you should run in 45-50min.

>Warthog
>minigun
Warthogs have chainguns, not miniguns.

Semantics, its a big fucking gun that fires an ass load of bullets and makes things very dead

You mean a puma?

Stop making up animals.

edgy?

or they try to just look at the funny stuff instead of bullshit political propaganda that's spewed everywhere on here

isn't internet knowledge what 4chan is for?

You may not want to hear it but, by blocking content and users that post it, you are in fact using a major SJW tactic, even if it is just for yourself you are censoring out things you do not like to create a 'fuzzy warm safe space place' In the end constant blocking of what is common on FJ will actually do more harm than good. I mean ya its good for pointless troll accounts or people that are essentially a one trick message pony like that one guy that basically posts nothing but save the earth stuff and, last i checked, prevents people from commenting, but ultimately funny junks major traffic is based around those sorts of people. If those people stop seeing thumbs, good or bad, they may very well leave feeling they are not getting the attention a lot of them no doubt crave. It is largely speculatory on my part yes, but I have in my own experience seen similar things happen more than once.

On the opposite spectrum, in California you could walk into a preschool and mow down 40 kids in front of a video camera, smiling at it and giving it a close up, and either get insanity charges, endless appeals, or life in prison with 3 meals a day. Definitely not all states are the same. In my opinion, it's about moderation. Saving death penalty for horrendous crimes that have incredibly small doubt, and more hard evidence. So while a guy who likely did a murder isnt killed but gets life with chances at appeals, but the guy who does a massacre infront of cameras gets a fast pass to hell.

nothing is sacred, some things we just like more than others so we put greater value on them.

I don't really understand how, but isn't there an internet fact floating around that says the death penalty is actually more expensive than a life sentence?

How the fuck can it cost a million dollars to off a guy?
I could hire a fucking hitsquad for 10 grand...

It's not the cost of the execution itself, but the cost of the constant appeals and court time.

the goal is to rehabilitate as well, like theres no way to be 100% sure a criminal can never become a functioning member of society again either.
personally i believe anyone can change, the hard part is knowing how to persuade them.

It's not always about the criminals themselves changing.
I mean, if someone steals food or money to pay for expensive medical treatment I don't really think it's their fault. They don't want anything extravagant, they just want to survive because their current job does not allow that or they can't find a job (I imagine homeless people have a hard time at that).

i feel like the choice of death penalty vs life imprisonment should be up to the one who is receiving the punishment. i couldn't live inside a prison, i would go insane

The death penalty should always be the most severe punishment, nothing more nothing less.
The problem is of course that it is irreversible so one would argue to only use it on those sure to be guilty.
However when you start adding doubt into the justice system, the system fails.

In most cases I'd agree but I work in a field where this is not the case and there may be others. I'm an acoustician, I do a lot of field measurements of noise levels for design or noise impact purposes.
Anyway, in the field no device can avoid being influenced by uncontrollable factors to get a measurement more accurate than around +-0.5 dB. Reporting more than 1 decimal place outside of a controlled anechoic laboratory calibration situation would be a straight up false declaration of your level of accuracy.
If your device recorded 62.2 dB, then all you know is that the level is somewhere between about 61.7 and 62.7. Reporting 62.2 dB would be a lie because it implies that you are accurate to the nearest 0.1 dB.
Even just reporting 62 dB would be somewhat dodgy in some situations because the true level could round up to 63 dB.
Unless you explicitly state your error (e.g. 62.2 +-0.5 dB) you often ought to just say 60 dB and leave it at that to avoid falsely declaring an accuracy level that you can't justify.
Typically we might use the nearest integer and then say +-3 dB just to be sure (accounts for most changes in season, weather, etc)

They probably use whole numbers because it's an elementary school test and they didn't learn commas yet.
And no, in real world applications you don't use precise numbers but have a set amount of digits after the comma until you round depending on the situation

we say commas in both math and business classes in uni, get off your high horse

Well if the car was very attentive he could've noticed the bike, but I wouldn't have to struggle to blame the car if the bike wasn't driving like a dumb cunt

and under that project the Canadians built the scale model in jasper

You would think it would be obvious but like I said the last time I saw this, I have had people argue with me, they claimed it was the car's fault and such, so its not as obvious as you would think.

Well if the car was very attentive he could've noticed the bike, but I wouldn't have to struggle to blame the car if the bike wasn't driving like a dumb cunt