The difference is that the short man in the suit has professional liability insurance.
If someone tries some dumb shit and gets a pavement facial Moama can almost certainly beat an assault charge, but civil injury claims are notoriously bad if you’re rich. An ambulance chaser will offer to take the case for free and be such a pest that its worth $100k to Moama to make him fuck off.
The little guy can sit there in court, dispassionately explaining that he felt his client was in danger and let the ambulance chaser argue with an insurance company (and we all know how much they love cutting cheques).
I honestly believe that if you’re convicted of shit like this the band should be able to sue to have your rights to royalties and any songwriting/producing credits revoked. Even if they have to surrender any monetary outcome to the victims or their families.
I cant find the video but there was a very serious accident in Australia at a theme park and several people died. The ambulance crews who attended reported that “The patients suffered injuries incompatible with life” and the media had a fucking field day about how paramedics shouldnt be making jokes and how cold and insensitive it was and blah blah blah.
The Ambulance service had a press conference the following day which was one of the absolute best public ass chewings Ive ever seen. The guy tore into the media like a wolverine. Heavily paraphrased but - “Our paramedics are not doctors, legally speaking they cannot pronounce someone dead. They do however know that a man who has been literally torn to pieces by heavy machinery cant be helped. They have to stand there, look at that scene and make a realistic professional assessment that the patient has suffered injuries that nobody could survive and report that. Then they have to look at the next person… and report that professionally too… and then the next one… And without doing any investigation into our procedures and the why of them you decide to report on OUR professionalism!?!”
Ive seen that many adds for idiotic games where the stupid fuck in the add is obviously just playing the game poorly and I KNOW its a tactic to get me to prove how smaht I am by getting the game and doing better than the shitstick in the video. I KNOW its a manipulation tactic.
Its honestly not a bad idea. When Sails fell out of fashion, canvas was the height of technology, nobody gave a fuck about emisions and tanker fuel was cheap AF.
If the owners of tanker/container fleets can see a $20,000 reduction a year in fuel costs by fitting a modern well designed $10,000 sail that costs $5000 a year to maintain. They will.
If multinational trillion dollar industries can find ways to save money AND go green at the same time. Good.
Bosch doesnt really enter the chat in a lot of places because their range of (excellent) tools just isnt that big.
If you’re looking to enter a dad dick measuring contest with your tool collection Bosch isnt going to win, I swear Ryobi is about 3 seconds from bringing out a battery powered battery.
You’re pretty much right. The big difference is that gun ownership in Australia was never widespread. America literally CANNOT afford to do a buyback.
I’ve broken down the numbers here and on Reddit before and I always get downvoted to hell and back so I cant be fucked. But if every last American just gave their guns back, at an average buyback price of $1000 per gun you’re looking at 332 Billion dollars. Thats before you add the other costs like collection, destruction and disposal.
Not even coming close to mentioning the costs involved in handling the “Cold dead hands” crowd, the preppers, the militias and the illegal unregistered firearms.
Aaaaand the destruction of a vast multi billion dollar a year peripheral industry of shooting ranges, gun stores, accessory manufacturers, ammunition manufacturers.
In short, while America needs to do SOMETHING the “Just ban guns” crowd are infuriating in their naivety.
Now I’m Australian so what I saw might not have been the full picture but it felt like Hillary ran a lazy campaign at least from the international coverage.
I dont remember a single specific thing about it, no policies, platforms or sound bytes. It wasnt memorable. What I do remember was mostly commentary about how she was clearly better than Trump. It felt like she expected to win on name recognition and because he was so clearly wrong for the job.
Just my thoughts, I have no doubt there was medding but I also dont think she played a strong game either.