I still listen to the noises. The cpu makes a unique whine when I highlight text.

I wish fucking supermarkets would understand this. I don't have to be told in a super loud fucking annoying voice that I need to place the object in the bagging area, or switch to the other machine to use my card. I've already hit the fucking button to use the cc machine, you fucking nonces! I've already placed the goddamn stupid fucking bananas in the stupid fucking bagging area, shut the fuck up! AAAAAH!

It's even worse now because you used to be able to mute the mother fucker, but now they've disabled that option.

You can tell based on the pattern of damage. Handcuffs placed very tightly will bite into the skin and cause skin damage to the immediate site, typically beyond the epidermal layer, and because they are cutting off circulation, will cause ischemic injury to areas distal to the handcuff placement and deep to the integumentary borders (because nerves especially are a little more prone to damage due to hypoxia, dying in as little as 3-5 minutes if the area is completely hypoxic). The damage would essentially be similar in appearance to the ligature marks made during a strangulation; you'd see a band of very damaged tissue. If the only thing that had occurred to damage this individual's skin was handcuffs being too tight, you'd see the line that is pictured in the second and third images, more damage from it, and it would be the only injury.

If you look at picture 1 and 3, you can see that the damage is very wide compared to the handcuff width, and not localized in a single band. The damage is also all superficial, at it looks like it barely went through to the dermis, much less the hypodermis. These seem like scrapes from the individual pulling and twisting against the cuffs.

The best explanation (ever) for a sovereign citizen is found in a legal opinion by a Canadian judge. He spends about 176 pages delineating their beliefs, origins, and manner of interacting with the legal system.

https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc/2012/2012abqb571/2012abqb571.html

It will be low. Super low. $300k is pocket change when the incidence for gun carriers to use them is extremely low. It's why we can constantly mock the tacti-cool warriors for thinking they need a gun on them at all times. Plus, the insurance company has way more flexibility in proving their client was not at fault in the incident compared to the shenanigans they have to pull now for car wrecks.

And this is why you should block ads, sheeple! So the government don't get ya!

What an amusing way for the manhunt to play out. I'm sure the fella who came up with the idea received some praise.

I highly doubt the supreme court will care about breaking apart the way we think the legal system works. They'll just take another case that would have its handling changed, and declare that 'this particular instance works the old way, but that other one works the new way, (stick fingers in their ears) la la la la'

Meh. My partner reads a book all the time at night, and it's not such a big deal. Some cars are worse than others, and some people completely overreact.

Angles, baby, they let water dangle from a small hill and curb.

Those poor guys are cold! Look at how they're forced into wearing those head-warming knitted hats.

Well that wasn't what I expected to hear. I'm curious why their heating supplies are falling/failing. Isn't oil the one thing they actually have an excess of?

Having been involved in something that was actually bad, I can say with certainty that there are enough rules already (in most places) that apply to these sorts of situations. Harassment and stalking crimes cover the sorts of things that need to be handled by police. If someone teabags you in Halo, or curses at you or says disgusting things in a voice chat, you either block them or shake your head and move on. If they follow you around through multiple lobbies, send/spam pictures or post/spray real pictures of genitalia (in places where it is not supposed to be, such as your inbox/cellphone/vr lobbies, obviously not talking about nsfw sites), those things are already crimes covered by harassment/stalking/sexting crimes.

There may be a few edge cases where someone can skirt the laws, but again, in my experience, the statutes are broad enough to catch almost everything you could imagine and want to be a crime.