• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Liffguard

  • Rank
    A gentleman and a scholar.

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Devon, UK

Recent Profile Visitors

7,457 profile views
  1. Welp, in reference to my previously mentioned situation, turns out she's a 9/11 truther. So, bullet dodged I guess?
  2. I think this would honestly be the best outcome for all involved. I think that rehabilitation can happen, even for crimes as damaging as this. It's to everyone's benefit to allow people back into society if they're no longer deemed a threat, and that means being able to find employment and develop a career. But he's certainly not owed any specific career, and putting himself out in the public eye is not helping his victim or his family in any way. So yeah, he should probably find a different vocation, and live a life of quiet obscurity, preferably in service to his community. There's dignity in that, and maybe, possibly redemption.
  3. Uh, really? Hard left?
  4. It was a joke, in reference to claims made that some people are voting conservative because they feel that the left villify conservatives too harshly.
  5. Thanks all, that's confirming what I wanted to do anyway i.e. stay friendly and courteous at work and otherwise just let it be. There's a reason I'm normally opposed to workplace hijinks. But then I suppose drunken office party hook-ups are a time-honoured British tradition so I guess I got to play my part in keeping the tradition alive?
  6. So here's my present situation. A little while back I went on a night out with work colleagues. Everyone ended up pretty hammered and I ended up making out with another colleague I hadn't known particularly well up to that point. It doesn't go any further than that and I wake up the next morning a little embarrassed, very hung-over, and willing to sweep it all under the rug. I go into work on monday morning with a very specific intention to just let it be and play it cool. She however has made a specific effort to interact more with me. And actually it turns out she's a very cool person who I would be happy to be friends with. But not date, partly because I don't want to date a co-worker and partly because I don't particularly want to date at all right now. She hasn't brought up drunken shenanigans, I haven't brought up drunken shenanigans, but a small part of me wonders if I'm leading her on. Is that just excess ego on my part? I don't want to give her the wrong idea but I also don't want to just not interact with her, but I also don't want to make things awkward by bringing up drunken shenanigans, even if just to clear the air. Do I just continue as I have been so far, being friendly but not brining anything else up or taking it further? Am I just massively overthinking everything again?
  7. It would be very difficult to use the legislature to restrict police use of firearms this way. I'm going a bit above my paygrade here so if anyone with more knowledge wants to clarify or correct what I'm saying ( @BigFatCoward ) I'd welcome it. Firearms officers are only deployed in situations where it is assessed there is a threat to human life that cannot be adequately dealt with by non-firearm carrying offciers. Police can only use lethal force in direct defence of human life. But the decision to deploy armed police is not a political one, it's based on police professional decision making models. Restricting the deployment of firearms officers would require justifying why they were no longer required to defend human life in situations where the lack of firearms is deemed inadequate by the police decision-making model. That seems like a tough sell even for Corbyn.
  8. It was a pretty dumb question since there are already rules that determine when and where armed police can use lethal force, not direct orders from the Prime Minister. In a situation where lethal force was not justified by those rules then an order from the PM would be illegal and should be ignored. In a situation where it was justified the order would be redundant becuase lethal force would already be legitimate.
  9. Just for the sake of clarification, the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, is muslim. The Lord Mayor, Andrew Parmley, is not. Sorry for the pedantry but the two roles are very different.
  10. Good question, and my answer is that I don't know. I'm just very wary of "clear," "obvious" or "common-sense" answers to complicated sociological questions.
  11. That's not necessarily clear at all. It doesn't automatically follow that if most recent attacks were carried out by muslims then more muslims equates to more attacks. It might, but you'd need to demonstrate a causal link. Maybe there's a small dedicated core of extremists who commit attacks, who's numbers don't necessarily change in line with the larger population around them (or maybe not). Or maybe attackers are coming from a particular subset of muslims, and you could easily increase the numbers of other subsets without increasing attacks (or maybe not). I don't know if any of these scenarios are actually the case. I'm just saying that the situation isn't "clear" at all. Just because something is obvious doesn't make it true. Edit: also factor in that recent deaths from terrorism in Europe aren't massively out of line with historical averages, and that muslims are just one group amongst many who are disproportionately responsible for attacks.
  12. One review of that movie I saw (I think it was Moviebob maybe) made the excellent point that the movie works becuase presenting the terrorists as a bunch of bickering failures who don't even know that much about the religion they're supposedly sacrificing themselves for is simultaneously funny but also kind of scary. After all, an ideologically committed, criminally-hardened mastermind might be a dangerous threat but they're also pretty thin on the ground and can conceivably be sought out and fought against. Whereas almost any bored, jaded, nihilistic, not-particularly-bright young adult could conceivably become the sort of loser terrorist from four lions, and could still kill a lot of people (particularly with the new prevalence of vehicle attacks).
  13. This thread is reminding me how long it's been since I met with anyone from the board in person. I'm super bummed-out that I can't make it to Worldcon. It's true, your laugh is very impressive.
  14. My personal prediction, based on nothing more than gut feeling and reading the papers, is for a Tory majority of around 30 or so. Still a respectable win absent expectations or context, but not the absolute blowout that it originally seemed we were heading for. I'll be voting independent myself. The Lib Dems and Labour were fourth and fifth respectively in my constituency during the last election, whereas the centre-left independent candidate came second place (though still with less than half the votes of the Tory winner).
  15. When it comes to pop-science I like books that use the science or technical subject as the framing for a larger story, whilst still giving you good info on the subject. There's two I can think of off the top of my head that stood out to me. The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot. I think this one's quite famous due to an HBO movie now? The story of the origin of Hela cells which are apparently of inestimable importance to research in medicine and cellular biology, and also the story of the woman they came from and the fortunes of her family. Carrying the Fire by Michael Collins. The autobiography of the Apollo 11 command module pilot. He's got a very easy to read writing style, with a dry wit and some moments of real poignancy. His description of the solitude of being alone in the command module on the far side of the moon whilst Armstrong and Aldrin were on the surface creates some amazing frisson.