But Seriously...

ESPN's E:60 is showing a piece about Chris Singleton, a student athlete whose mother was one of the nine murdered by Dylan Roof. He's an amazing young man, raised by an incredible mother. You really need to catch this episode if you get a chance. Powerful, powerful stuff.

 

So I hate to say this, but I've seen sliced up dead babies. Literally, dead babies, a few months old, in centimetre thin slices. I have seen similar displays of what were once fetuses. I was in an anatomy museum at my university, and you had to be a student registered in an anatomy course to be able to so much as enter the place (and it was a rather well-kept secret if you weren't). Sometimes these things are disturbing, sometimes they don't make sense to outsiders, but they are important and necessary for learning about these things. Anatomy as a science has always been viewed with suspicion and early anatomists used to have to procure cadavers through illegal means to be able to study what they do. If we're going to watch a video and without any other background information, knowledge about the subject or even context and declare it to be "all kinds of fucked up", I'd really hate to see what happens when a part of your job that doesn't make sense to outsiders is put under a microscope. The sad thing is that because it's Planned Parenthood, people feel qualified to pass judgment. I can certainly imagine a controversial video from numerous other professions being defended as necessary and declare that anyone who "wasn't there" unqualified to so much as comment or pass judgment.

 

I think this illustrates the whole problem with the "controversy." The fact is the videos are a hoax, done by a sham organization that a history of this kind of manipulative crap. The full unedited videos show that the Planned Parenthood reps are doing nothing illegal, and are definitely not "profiting off of dead body parts of babies." Is some of the language used by the doctor unsettling? Sure, but remember these are doctors talking in a clinical manner, no different than how most doctors talk about areas of their work that are uncomfortable for the average person. Anyone can do 5 minutes of research to realize this video is a hoax.

I understand that the efforts in Congress to defund Planned Parenthood are purely political, but it annoys me to no end that this entire controversy has lasted this long and has gotten this far.

And let's not forget that the transaction being discussed in the video is related to research that one day will probably cure some of the worst diseases and generally has been supported by both political parties.

 

Well I guess I have to chime in here.

Spoiler: It's long

I don't think I can respond to most of this within board-legal bounds but, for starters, elective abortion is an option up to 24 weeks. Due to state laws, there are very few Planned Parenthood centers that go up to that limit (one in NYC, a couple in California, there may still be one in Texas, and I think somewhere else - maybe Chicago?) If an abortion is being done past 24 weeks it's a lifesaving procedure where the options are the mother and pregnancy die or the mother lives, and it's not done at a Planned Parenthood center. So, regardless of the problematic semantics there, it's just not based in fact.

And, by the way, in the case of Bobby J trying to get rid of louisiana's planned parenthood centers, neither of those offer abortion services. The closest one that does is in Mobile, AL about 150 miles away. So in that case, and many others, it really is a case of "hiding behind women's health"

Insurance is something that helps you pay for healthcare. It does not provide you healthcare. (And even though you're not saying it directly - Obamacare is a system to help people afford insurance. It does not provide you healthcare.) Doctors and other medical professionals are the people you go to see forth at healthcare. Planned Parenthood centers are places where doctors and other medical professionals work. So even if you have insurance that you can afford, you're still going to need somewhere to go to use that insurance to get shit done. If I oversimplified that to the point of being condescending, I'm sorry, but Throughout my time at PP and reading commentary whenever these things flare up, it is insane how few people grasp these differences.

Now that a lot more people have insurance in general, in an ideal world Planned Parenthood wouldn't be as necessary. Not everyone is insured still though, and not everything is covered under insurance - even the stuff that's supposed to be still isn't because insurances are finding all these sneaky ways to get out of it. But, it also serves as not being just a place for more affordable health services, but many times the only place to get services at all. A lot of centers are in places that are medically underserved in general, for any kind of healthcare, and people still have to travel hours to get there. There's also the matter of while there may be other doctors around that are technically able to provide birth control and other sex health services, there are tons of doctors who have no idea what the fuck they're talking about with any of this. I guess they consider it a niche issue or deem it not important enough to keep up to date with yet still feel qualified to dole out information and services because they have a PHD. The level of inaccuracy is mind blowing. A scary amount of those quotes that blow up are by politicians who are/were also OB/GYNs and serving on boards for gynecologists and STILL think these ridiculous things. there are also still a ton of people who have a problem with women being sexual beings and think that wanting to be on birth control makes you a slut. Or are either anti-gay/trans or are just hugely uneducated on issues and services specific to those groups. So even if there are other general doctors around, maybe even other low cost providers, Planned Parenthood still may be the only option for effective, accurate, nonjudgmental healthcare.

As currerbell already said, while money exchanges hands there isn't a profit made. There is also money exchanged to "sell" dead infants to crematories to throw their bodies into a fire where they fall apart and turn into dust. (See I can use poetic language too.) someone also had to be paid to slice those dead babies into pieces for ghetto astronaut to study. These things are not fun or comfortable to think about. But it's a reality of medicine and science.

And as the person before me pretty much said, basically any argument made by anyone who's drawing their conclusions from this organization's versions of their videos is invalid. They're basically just a marketing firm for the prolife movement that hires talented video editors. The last thing they tried to pull off happened shortly after I started working for PP, and as someone who's obviously going to be skeptical of whatever their claims are, I assumed they pulled a couple of smooth editing moves but the final product wouldn't be that far from the truth - just about something anyone who's against abortion would disagree with. But they had us all watch the leaked unedited version to compare it to the one they released and even I was shocked at how much it was cut up. (Sadly I can't find the video anywhere other than HuffPo and as much as I hate linking to them: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/01/live-action-planned-parenthood-videos_n_1563241.html ) this was three years ago and it's a half hour long so I'm not going to refresh my memory but from what I recall there were a couple moments where I thought the PP employee fucked up in her wording (it's a weird situation to be in to balance the "customer service wanting to please" mindset when talking about these kinds of things) but the reality was so boring that they had to put in real effort to make it remotely controversial. I've felt no need to seek out the unedited version this time around, but it's probably out there somewhere and it's probably worth watching. And hey if you feel the same way afterward then that's fine. I know stem cell research and the like is a controversial subject regardless of whether or not PP is involved so I don't think its that crazy to be against it. It's just not a terribly unique thing for PP to participate in or further evidence of its evil.

 

Hate to hop in and derail this thread as I have been purposely staying out. But I feel morally obligated to post this story after all the race conversation we've had. It's fucked up the Zachary Hammond story isn't being talked about more. A Cop Killed A White Teen and the #AllLivesMatter Crowd Said Nothing. This shit is just depressing. Adam Carolla has always been vocal about there being shitty cops to everyone, regardless of race. That media just picks up on the racial aspect to sensationalize it. I've been uncomfortable with that statement/line of thinking, because people who hear it can't process that it isn't 0% or 100%. This shit is fucked up. It's just fucking sad.

Please share this story on your social networks. People need to keep sharing this story until the news gets big enough that policy makers can't ignore. There needs to be some goddamn regulation and re-thinking of the entire police system that can allow us to be like other countries where the police are shooting citizens up.

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/police-respond-report-gunman-tennessee-theater-n404651

It is my personal opinion those types are part of the reason we still have as many mass shootings as we do. Their loud, nearsighted rhetoric concerning anything to do with firearms and mental health is a significant impetus. But we had this conversation before, several times.

This fucker brought a HATCHET. That is fucking insane. The only death is the shooter's so far, and a hatchet injury is being reported. So, hopefully this one failed miserably. When one does it, others are sure to follow. However, it appears "theater shooting" is now a thing we will have to live with. When theaters start putting up metal detectors and TSA type screenings, let's hear these people talk about erosion of rights versus enforcing gun laws and mental health standards.

During a matinee screening of Mad Max. That's only in the dollar theaters now. Guy couldn't even be bothered to pay full admission price.

 

You know you suck when you arrive in hell and they boo you.

 

If someone in the theater shot him, god help us, we will never hear the end of it. "See, we don't need gun reform!" because one guy in the history of spree shooters was effective.

You know, this shooter was in the cheapo theater, in the afternoon during summer break. He was looking for someone in particular, or he was targeting kids. Sleep tight, folks.

 

Supposedly the gunman had a backpack full of stuff, although they're not really reporting on what was in it. That area of town is pretty run down now, when I first heard about it my thought was, if it was a planned mass shooting, he didn't really plan it out well. There's at least three other theaters that are in more populated areas and would have a lot bigger crowds.

 

Well, that's exactly the problem. "It doesn't look good". There are times when optics matter in a very real way, and then there are times when concern about optics becomes a form of concern trolling. If something is unpleasant but necessary, we should have the courage and fortitude to stand up and defend it despite perception and public opinion. You've written on the board about how you once killed a deer who had been injured by a car because you wanted to end its suffering. How would you feel if I just stood there and said "Woah dude, that's fucked up." You'd defend your actions by saying that while it might have been unpleasant, it was the right thing to do. "Yeah, but it still looks pretty bad" doesn't make a very good answer to a serious moral argument.

I'd also like you to point out exactly which law you're referring to that says that the focus has to be on the safety of the patient and no consideration may be made to producing a specimen. Is it an American or Canadian law? Is it legislation or is it a standard of practice published by a licensing body? Is there any evidence that a health care professional actually sacrificed patient safety in order to produce a certain specimen?

I'm thinking of all the rounds that I've sat in on, especially rounds in the ICU setting or grand rounds about end-of-life issues. I could show you unedited videos of doctors talking about issues like pulling a patient off life support that would make more than a few of you scared of intensivists. Heck, they even disturbed me at the time - it felt like they were a bunch of callow, jaded people who viewed human bodies as machines that were using up resources and costing money and needed to be moved out of the way because they weren't going to get better. Edited audio could have caused a scandal. But when you actually understand things as they do, when you understand something as a professional and an expert and not a scared family member watching an elderly relative hooked up to a series of tubes, you think about things differently, you talk about things differently, and you say things like "the next of kin saying 'Grandma isn't ready to die yet' is more likely them just saying 'I'm not ready for grandma to die yet'" and while it sounds shocking at first, it doesn't make them a monster.

 

Latest local article on Hammond.
http://www.thestate.com/news/local/article30174711.html

Spoiler: Spoilered for length

A lawyer for the family of a Seneca teenager who was shot and killed by a police officer said Wednesday an independent autopsy confirms that the officer’s life was not endangered by the teenager’s car veering toward him when he fired the fatal shot.

The autopsy, done for the family by two pathologists with the Greenville Health System, indicates that Zachary Hammond was shot “from left to right and back to front.”


Seneca Police Chief John Covington has said the officer, who he has refused to name, fired at close range into the open driver’s side window as the car veered at him from an angle, threatening to run over him.

Covington said Wednesday that he won’t comment on the new autopsy or lawyer’s statements, pending the outcome of the official investigation.


“All of the facts and circumstances will come out within the proper venue,” he said.

10th Circuit Solicitor Chrissy Adams said she has seen the independent autopsy report and spoken to the doctor who performed it and believes it is “consistent” with the findings of the original autopsy.

She also took issue with statements put out by Hammond family attorney Eric Bland in calling Covington’s description of the incident “deceptive” for having said Hammond was shot in the chest.

“This is not the case,” Adams said of the attorney’s dispute. “These statements are consistent with Coroner Karl Addis’ prior press release on July 28, 2015, that states ‘Mr. Hammond sustained two gunshot wounds to the upper left torso (chest & collarbone-shoulder). The gunshot wound to the chest was fatal; the gunshot wound to the collarbone-shoulder region was not a fatal wound.’”


Bland said he believes the second autopsy shows that the officer was not in the path of the car and was far enough to the side to be out of any danger.

“One of two things happened,” Bland said. “The officer negligently thought there was a weapon in the car and there was not; or he was angry at Zachary for not following his instructions or that Zachary was trying to flee, so he shot him.”

The autopsy showed that Hammond was shot twice, wounding him in “the left posterior shoulder and left flank.” One of the bullets went through his heart and lungs.

Bland made an issue out of the coroner’s classifying the death as homicide. Adams said the legal definition of homicide is “the killing of one person by another.”


“Once this investigation is complete, we will be able to determine whether or not this is a justifiable or criminal homicide,” Adams said.

In response to Adams’ statement, Bland issued another one, quoting the coroner using the word “murder.”

“We didn't want to have to publish it but we are now left with no choice to put Ms. Adams’ reference to homicide in its proper context,” he said.

Bland said Addis made the statement in front of a retired police detective who is prepared to testify to it if necessary.

Addis then issued a statement, saying, “During the course of my conversations with the Hammond family and their legal representation, I referred to the death of Mr. Hammond as homicide, not murder.”

He defined homicide as an “individual died at the hands of another.”

“Mr. Hammond died at the hands of another individual, in this case a Seneca Police officer,” Addis said. “Mr. Hammond was shot through an open driver’s door window. Mr. Hammond indeed was operating the vehicle at the time of the incident; the vehicle was reported to be in motion at the time of the shooting in a direction the officer felt threatened.

“I do not know the exact position of Mr. Hammond in the driver’s seat at the time the officer fired his weapon and Mr. Hammond was shot.”

He said he had not seen the independent autopsy report and wouldn’t comment on it.

The independent autopsy has been turned over to the State Law Enforcement Division, which is investigating the shooting and to the state Attorney General’s Office, Bland said.

Adams said she is ethically prohibited from discussing the facts of a pending investigation or case.

Hammond, 19, was shot on July 26 in the parking lot of Hardee’s restaurant on U.S. 123 in what police described as an attempted arrest for selling marijuana.

Tori Dianna Morton, 23, of Pickens was in the car but uninjured in the incident, police said. She was charged with simple possession of marijuana, but not for selling any drugs.

Covington said a white powder believed to be cocaine was found in the car along with a bag of marijuana, but lab test results haven’t been released.

 

That guy that shot and killed a cop in Memphis? His friends and family are holding a fund raiser to get an attorney.

If that isn't misuse of food stamps, it damn well should be.

 

The dude was fucked in the head ten ways from sunday. He had been institutionalized four times, had been taken to the hospital for his own safety after the cops got called on him countless other times, and his family members made sure the proper authorities knew he was shit side of shady. That level of documented insanity will make sure you can't purchase a gun, at least legally.

When you're that mentally ill, the concept of "planning" is a nebulous idea at best. I'm kind of surprised he had enough clear thought to get that much pepper spray, actually. Connecting the dots, looked like he just wanted to agitate people enough that the cops would respond with deadly force so he could do a little real life Call of Duty and have them kill him.

 

Partially technical/partially political...

If someone were to make an attempt to digitally wipe something clean, like a server or a hard drive, does doing that leave any kind of evidence? Basically, if Hillary tried to destroy or erase evidence, might there be some sort of footprint indicating such?