San Francisco to allow police 'killer robots'

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Leftists aren’t supposed to remove agency from individuals,, they’re supposed to recognize issues on a collective level or recognize how an individual is mistreated particularly/specifically.

But it seems like they really do remove agency from individuals, most of the time. Again, I go back to my observation about the ending of The Bad Guys.

They’re not removing agency if all they are doing is talking about it.

To treat an individual as a piece of a collective can question agency and be victimizing, but what matters is how it impacts the person. Talking about issues doesn’t do much to impact a person or remove their agency.

[Frustration]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

[McAvoy]

Aww now yet again it's become Dragon Ball Fan's Police Reform topic. What is this the fifth time now?

The guy doesn't reply to anything in months except his now BS apology post and someone mentions something about cops and he is all over it.

[Draco Dracul]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

[McAvoy]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

[hammerofglass]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

Disagree with that last point. The right thinks THEY PERSONALLY should be able to say anything without repercussions, but not the rest of us. If they believed everyone should be able to say anything they wouldn't be doing the book bannings and such.

[McAvoy]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

Disagree with that last point. The right thinks THEY PERSONALLY should be able to say anything without repercussions, but not the rest of us. If they believed everyone should be able to say anything they wouldn't be doing the book bannings and such.

Well I did say under simplistic terms. Adding more to it doesn't make it simplistic.

Funny thing is about cancel culture. That has existed far longer than what it's being used for now. And guess who was the main culprit?

[clearspira]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

Disagree with that last point. The right thinks THEY PERSONALLY should be able to say anything without repercussions, but not the rest of us. If they believed everyone should be able to say anything they wouldn't be doing the book bannings and such.

No, McAvoy got it right the first time. You are living in a Grade-A echo chamber there.

Also, LOL, you think no one on the Left has ever tried to ban a book? Because ''The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn'' might have something to say about that.

[hammerofglass]

Although logically there doesn't need to be any connection between political affiliation and other traits, researchers have found consistent patterns between personality and politics.

At least in the US, 'leftists' tend to believe responsibility and power rest outside of the individual, while 'rightists' tend to believe in individual power and responsibility. In both cases, regardless of the facts of a given situation.

It's not surprising that leftists would tend to take power away from individuals in favor what is 'supposed' to be a collective response.

Collective power means that most individuals gain significantly more power than they have now as most power is held by a small number of individuals. The vast majority of people currently have nearly no power only the option to vote between the kill you fast party and the kill you not as fast party.

In simplistic terms under that simplistic narrow view of things, being on the left is about the collective. Everyone getting their fair shake, everyone pays their fair share, etc. Right would be about the individual and their freedoms. Doing or saying anything under the law. Their level prosperity is their level of capability and drive.

Under simplistic terms.

Problem is something as simple as freedom of speech and how it's interpreted. That is what drives that wedge between right and left. Left for example and would be about you can say something but doesn't protect you against repercussions. Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

Disagree with that last point. The right thinks THEY PERSONALLY should be able to say anything without repercussions, but not the rest of us. If they believed everyone should be able to say anything they wouldn't be doing the book bannings and such.

No, McAvoy got it right the first time. You are living in a Grade-A echo chamber there.

You're projecting so hard I could use you for PowerPoint presentations.

You simp for "make it illegal to let children know racism or queer people exist" DeSantis every time his name gets mentioned on here, you know damn well what you stood up to be counted with.

[Draco Dracul]

Whereas the right would say you should be able to say anything without repercussions.

That's just objectively false. The right is actively trying make a lot of speech illegal. For instance a male teacher talking about his husband.