Search Results: is she a risk

If the vehicle plates are known (99% of cop cars have dashcam) is there really any reason to chase them immediately?

Obviously if their crime is a violent felony that is a factor but almost ALL chases are the result of a initial traffic stop or at worst robbery (yes that could be violent felony but the vast majority of robberies only threaten violence, not inflict actual violence).

From the FBI:

Successful restrictions: Cities like Milwaukee, Los Angeles, and Orlando have restricted chase policies and have not seen corresponding spikes in crime.

Alternative technology: Some police departments are using GPS tracking units that can be fired onto a fleeing vehicle, allowing officers to disengage from a high-speed chase while still tracking the suspect. In one set of case studies, 80% of speeders were still apprehended using this method.

Widespread fatalities: More than one person is killed every day on average in police pursuit crashes.

Risk to bystanders: Most of those killed in police chases are not the fleeing drivers. 25-40% involved uninvolved third parties.

Disproportionate harm: Black people are 4x more likely to be killed in police pursuits than white people.

Traffic violations: The majority of pursuits begin because of a minor traffic or property-related offense.

Fatal chases: From 2017 to 2022, 82% of fatal police chases started over a traffic stop. Only about 15% were for violent felonies.

Low felony arrest rate: Only 1 in 50 result in a felony arrest.

Significant failure and crash rates

High escape rate: Studies suggest that between 30% and 50% of police pursuits end with no capture.

High crash rate: An FBI analysis 35%-40% of all pursuits ended in a crash.

Ineffective deterrence: A study found that 75% of fleeing drivers said they would slow down after police disengaged.

High financial costs

Taxpayer expense: The costs of high-speed chases, including litigation and liability payouts for crashes.

You can SEE & ASSESS how much, placement & type of rebar, plumbing/heating/electric lines, type of concrete, ballistic capability of glass, roof design & materials, etc in the pix & rubble!!

What about the actual ballroom construction? Will / should that be public / visible? Just let anyone see design, materials, redundancies, etc?

My opinion? THIS IS MAGA LEVEL STUPID 🚩🚩🚩

My take: If you can get FOX & MSNBC to agree in solidarity, then you MUST be wrong Pete.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth has imposed new restrictive conditions on media access to the Pentagon, requiring reporters to commit to not acquiring or using any unauthorized information, whether classified or unclassified. Journalists must sign an agreement to this effect or risk losing their press credentials and physical access to the Pentagon. This policy also restricts reporters' movements within the Pentagon, banning access to large areas without official escorts and relocating dedicated workspace for news organizations to undisclosed locations, making it harder for reporters to interact with military personnel. Hegseth's policy demands that any information reported must be preauthorized for release by Pentagon officials, effectively granting the Pentagon editorial control over what journalists can publish. This move has been widely criticized by the Pentagon Press Association and major news outlets—including ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Fox News, The New York Times, and many others—who see it as a violation of First Amendment rights and an unprecedented attack on press freedom. Almost all media organizations have refused to sign the new rules, and many reporters have turned in their Pentagon press passes in protest.Hegseth defends the restrictions as common-sense measures to safeguard classified information and maintain order, but critics argue this escalates censorship and stifles transparency regarding military affairs. The policy also moves the Pentagon press corps toward an unprecedented absence of mainstream news coverage inside the Pentagon, breaking a tradition that had lasted since the Eisenhower era. Only one right-wing outlet, One America News, has agreed to the new conditions, while nearly all others stand in solidarity against them

LMFAO! This is what the AI said:

Major threats to the end of humanity along with their estimated likelihoods within the next century:

Unaligned Artificial Intelligence (AI): Approximate likelihood 1 in 10. This involves superintelligent AI systems whose goals may not align with human values, posing the highest anthropogenic extinction risk.

Engineered Global Pandemic: Approximate likelihood 1 in 30. This threat includes artificially created infectious diseases with high lethality and fast transmission.

Nuclear War: Lower but significant risk, possibly around 1 in 100 or more. While nuclear war could cause catastrophic destruction, total human extinction is debated.

Climate Change Failure: Moderate risk, roughly 1 in 10 to 1 in 20. While it could cause global calamity, it is less likely to lead to complete extinction.

Nanotechnology Risk: Lower and uncertain likelihood. Potential risks include misuse or accidents involving molecular nanotechnology.

Natural Catastrophes (asteroids, supervolcanoes, stellar explosions, coronal mass ejection, gamma rays,): Very low likelihood, roughly 1 in 1,000,000 per century combined. These events are rare but

Experts estimate the risk of human extinction this century may be around 1 in 6 (17%), with large uncertainties. Man-made risks are considered much more probable than natural.