you’ve been doing essentially the exact same thing

No, you have been arguing that this is a case of police brutality simply off of the fact that the person was shot in the back. I have been arguing that this situation is not as black and white as you suggest due to various possible circumstances.

Your whole choice of words just shows, that you have already made up your mind despite, as you said yourself, not being there.

And the vast majority of people with pepper spray in their eyes […]

The vast majority of people tend to tense up when tazed. […]

You see a pattern there? I’m not sure whether I am comfortable with “in the vast majority of cases, I was not murderer by a guy charging at me with a knife”.

They literally shot the man in the back three times, but K.

And that implies what exactly? Could have been running away, maybe. Could have turned on someone else, also possible. We do not know. Which is the whole point of the investigation, which according to you is a close and shut case. For all we know, police could have used all of those things, and we just focus on the fact that he was killed in the end.

There are clear cases of police brutality and violations of citizen rights in Germany. A guy throwing tear gas and wielding a knife simply has a high probability of not being one of them.

Pepper Spray

I am not sure how pepper spray is supposed to stop someone from wildly slashing around.

Not have tazers?

Been many times proven to be unreliable: Highly depends on what the attacker is wearing or which mental state he is in.

But the cops decided to take the US approach of shoot first ask questions later.

Guess we should task you with the investigation, since you appear to know a lot more than the rest of us.

allegedly he threatened the officers with tear gas or a knife, but even he did, in no way is shooting someone justified in this situation.

Have to disagree with you here: If threatened with a stick, police have to pull out a bigger stick to do their job.

If a person starts a fist fight, the baton is the proper method to a) defend yourself and b) gain an advantage over the attacker. If the person then pulls a knife, the baton loses its advantage and a new tool is needed to regain it.

The issue in this case is not the choice of the tool for the job: Pulling the gun on someone attacking others with a knife. The issue is the attacker was shot in the back, which raises the question if he was still a threat.

Little fun fact: The vests regular police are wearing in Germany (at least in the southwest where I live) are bulletproof against small arms fire, but not stab proof. So “just tackle him and take it on the armour” is not an option.

Germany here: I recently learned that a comparatively big local firm is planning to move their production to China. Some people never learn …

I remember that one documentary everyone at my school watched at least once during lessons: A bunch of animals in Africa getting drunk by eating fermenting fruit.

Bluesky, the decentralized social network […]

Were only one instance exist or did I miss something?

“Either they are making this up as they go along, or the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing,” said Aaron Weiss, deputy director of the Center for Western Priorities, a nonpartisan conservation group.

Why not both? The end goal is to hand over federal land to Burgum and friends, so as long as that happens who cares about the details?

OK, I am going to try arguiung that privacy supersedes food:

To have a right to anything means there is something that I own. Owning something puts a division between me and others who can not own this specific thing: My right is my own, I do not have to diminish it by sharing. The most fundamental form of division is absence. Having a right to privacy is a right to the absence from others. Therefore the right to privacy is a more fundamental one than the right to food.

However, I agree that in practice eating in public beats dying in private any time of the day. 🤷

I fully support sending Taurus to Ukraine but I am afraid this might be one of Merz’ ‘Stammtischreden’ that he does frequently: Just blurb out whatever he thinks at the moment and sounds good while at the bar, but then decides otherwise once sobered up.

It might certainly be a factor, though: German citizenship is very “valuable” in the sense that it opens a lot of possibilities for travelling. A lot of countries (and we are not just talking EU member states here) do not require as much paperwork or none at all if you own a German passport compared to a US one.

Oh, they can do that if need be. They already tested it.

Friendly reminder for everyone downvoting this piece of news. The downvote button is not a dislike button.

Not sure how to interpret your question.

In case my message wasn’t clear: I think the reason the rightwing extremist AFD has overtaken the conservative CDU in polls is twofold. On one hand the CDU is adopting more extreme rightwing rhetoric and this validates the AFD as ‘the original fascism’. Secondly the CDU opposed new debt based investments for the last four year and campaigned heavily based on this sentiment. Now they approved a plan for up to one TRILLION € of debt to finance defence and infrastructure related projects.

Why choose the off-brand when you can get the original fascism for the same one vote?

Especially considering that the conservatives fooled every voter by throwing out basically every fiscal austerity policy they so vehemently defended during the last years, the moment they won the election and now need money to form a functioning goverment.

The difference I see is that Ukraine has an offical foreign legion while Russia categorically denies any involvment of foreign forces on their sides.

Except, no employer will allow you to use your own AI model. Just like you can’t bring your own work equipment (which in many regards even is a good thing) companies will force you to use their specific type of AI for your work.

The CDU/CSU is exploring feasibility, but the SPD and Greens remain firmly against reversing the nuclear phase-out, citing stability and past policy shifts.

SPD, Greens, the power industry, economists … basically everyone except the guys who wouldn’t want a nuclear plant or waste dump next to them anyway: Söder Challenge

Uhm, I guess you missed the news when it was revealed that Deepseek had a little more backing than they claimed.

Because that’s easier to do than making rich peoples life harder.