Thanks, but I don’t really know what you mean by backstairs, as most apartments I know just open to the one staircase. It’s not way thin, but I’m just saying most of the ones in my city were wider and thicker. The ones which exist, that is. There’s only some of them left in the center and other apartment buildings are basic concrete shits.

My point is rather that it needn’t be a bank or anything like that to be somewhat fancy, that used to be in style… some time. Early 20th century, maybe?

Lol kinda basic older apartment building made of stone, I think you might be American, lol.

Those stairs aren’t even that thick, tbh.

I do get the vibe you’re talking about, but honestly the stone buildings in my city have wider and more elaborate staircases even when they never had any sort od business in the building. I’d love an apartment in one of those, if they weren’t solely in the center of the city, because the thick stone walls in them make it so you can hardly hear anything your neighbour is doing. Also the ceilings are tall af.

And now you’ve ran and taken the L, just like I said you would. Damn it’s boring when people like you are so easy to predict.

Oh, you’re already at the “I’m replying even though I’m not reading anything. I’m PROUD of my ignorance, despite you clearly predicting this is what I would do because I’m not man enough to admit when I am wrong”—phase? Wow, your psyche is in even worse condition that I’d have guessed haha.

You won’t be going anywhere. You’ll try to “get the last word” despite the fact that you won’t be able to address your own comments or the reason why you’re in this thread. Like I detailed in my last response you would do.

You’re dancing to my tune, Vanja. ;>

"Why would I need a therapist? I’m just pretending like reality is what I make it. Me? Wrong? Never. Not even when I continued to assume you’re an American, when you’re not. But I’m not man enough to admit to mistakes, so I’m just gonna let my ego take control. "

Get a therapist man, it really would improve you. There’s not any other direction than up with that sort of a psyche.

You claimed you “joined the conversation”, but then ramble on about things which were never part of it. Then when people try to make sense of your brainvomit, you get upset. Is it because you just find it a tad hard to admit to making mistakes? No problem, kiddo, most people do. Now we’ll see if you can grow up. I’ll wager not.

Which people should be getting themselves military hardware, and with what money? Military drones are thousands and thousands. Better ones hundreds of thousands. So who exactly should be getting them, what for, and do you not see what an utter child you are by stomping your foot that “no no no I am making sense, i am i am i am, but I will never explain any of it, you just don’t understand”

“Your country isn’t what you think it is.”

It really is. It isn’t what YOU think it is, because you were WRONG in your asinine assumptions so now you have to ramble to pretend you weren’t. You will never admit to having made a mistake.

You’ll avoid that bit while larping that you have something relevant to say, until you’ll devolve into “you think I’m reading all that” before finally succumbing and taking the L by stopping replying. It **always goes like that with babby egos like yours.

No, but you are.

When you join a conversation defending someone elses points, you can’t then pretend like you didn’t. Like you didn’t say all the moronic shit you did, like “your country is going to hell” or something, assuming I’m American. Will you admit you were wrong? Ofc you won’t.

Here’s the reminder though.

Flying while driving a car?

Hey newfriend, when you join a conversation, you then also have to join the conversation. You pretending like that is literally schizophrenic. “I’ve no idea what you’re talking about.”

You are just ashamed as hell of having been wrong, so now you’re pretending like no-one actually said “everyone should have them”. Them as in military hardware carrying bombs. But who’s gonna fly them? Everyone? Okay. Why? Because they’re a 50 dollar toy? Oh wait no, you’re pretending that wasn’t a part of the conversation you joined?

See. Go see a mental health professional you fking donkey.

I’m suggesting that people learn to fly them

Schizo much? That’s not the conversation you jointed, babby. How in the fuck is that related to any of this? “EVERYONE should have military hardware with bombs!”

Genuinely. Get a therapist or a psychiatrist.

unable to understand what needs to be done to fight it.

Literally schizophrenix. Were discussing 50 dollar toys and you ramble on about armed rebellion. Go to an ER.

This strawman isn’t even properly put together; it’s falling apart. If English isn’t your first language, skip the following: Write better.

I really wouldn’t talk with that sort of syntax. “They” became “they’re” due to my fat thumbs, not because I meant it to. I write pretty fast on a phone and like we all (should) know, the predictive algorithm sometimes get stuck with the wrong word, and I don’t really care yoo much (see, now I have to fix “yoo” to “too”. Better to remove “yoo” as a prediction really, but who’s got time for thay).

I’ll bet my left nut that if we both tested our English skills, I’d have a larger vocabulary and better syntax. More than ten years ago I surpassed the average native speaker in vocabulary size.

Cops should use their own moral judgement to selectively enforce the law, but also, cops should not use their own moral judgement to selectively enforce the law.

No, you’re just a dummy. There are laws in place which allow cops — just like soldiers, to not do what they’re commanded to do. They’re called “illegal orders”. So for instance if I were at war (and I am a sergeant in the reserves), I would never hesitate to question a direct command… unless it broke the core principles which are not my personal morals, but strict rules which are in place. At that point, if it’s murky if it is a legal order or not (as superiors officers often do give them, to both cops and soldiers), the first step is to ask it in writing. Then you can show that you protested, but as it was unclear, you did it anyway. However if your superiors officers tell you to do something clearly illegal like torturing people and kidnapping children, you don’t need to hesitate, and even getting it in writing wouldn’t help, as any reasonably well trained person should definitely understand the immortality and thus refuse to obey.

I’m not a Harry Potter encyclopedia so maybe your perception of Harry being a loose cannon is much more arbitrary than mine,

See what did I tell you about the syntax. Gjeoddamn.

But also, vocabulary. My definition isn’t arbitrary in the least. Are you sure you know the meaning of the word?

but in the context of someone refusing to enforce a law on moral grounds, you’re making zero sense to me.

Probably because you have zero actual understanding of the topic…?

It seems like you’re assigning “willy nilly” to selective enforcement you disagree with and “refusal” to selective enforcement you agree with.

Yes, you keep repeating your asinine and completely wrong argument. Did you just forget the other times, or do you repeat it so that you’ll remember it? Either way, kinda weird, and super wrong.

Let’s start small and check this out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_order_(international_law

I mean, as an actual disabled person… By just like, backing up to it?

Well, as an actual disabled person, how many different chairs do you have on a daily basis? Because as a taxi driver driving around disabled people, there’s a lot of different chairs.

I’ve never seen one without a backrest. Do you have one?

Could you back into that with a chair? Ofc.

But if yours has a backrest like all the other chairs, you’ll hit the backrest before with the back of your chair before you’d be in the same line as a person leaning back on other parts of the bench.

Not to even mention that a ton of the people that I know who use chairs have often have a bag or a backpack hanging back there.

I don’t want to be around when they pull into a parking spot and then can’t drive forward out of it…

As a professional driver, I can tell you that if you have to choose a parking place between a space that’s only just and just free (three cars around it, all parked tightly so as to not leave any extra room even close to the line), and one that is completely free, not a single car around it, you choose the latter one.

Can I reverse into the former? Ofc. Even just a few years after I started, when I was still very young, around 20, I made grown (and somewhat drunk) men give a little shriek as they thought I would crash the car when driving in places where they thought a car wouldn’t fit (because people were picked up usually from in front of a bar, and bars can exist in the weirdest places.)

So with that logic in mind, my question is why would you, as a chair user, ever want to back in to this bench, when you could just park next to it, effectively lengthening the bench?

Put 1,000 hotel rooms, but only 5 are made for accessibility? Your store has a wheelchair ramp, all the fuck at the end of the building near the loading docks?

Not a problem in the EU/Finland (idk which the regulations comes from) We got building regulations.

Shit, even paving walkways, in fucking modular concrete squares, suck ass: when (not if) the front wheels get stuck, especially if I’m being pushed, my ass gets launched.

I would’ve been proud if this wasn’t a problem either, but as someone who regularly pushed chairs, I’m so goddamn disappointed in my own city. They remodelled the market square for a parking garage they wanted to build below it. Corruption and capitalism wins and after years and years of talks, more years of building and millions of euros, we got an utterly shit market square made of roughly 40cm x 40cm tiles which won’t stay the fuck down because of the soil. I haven’t had to push a chair through that yet but I dread it for any one who does, be they pushing their own chairs or getting pushed. Hell, I’ve almost fallen down several times and I like to think I have good awareness in general.

It would be bad enough when a completely abled person falls off their feet, seems it would be much more devastating to someone in a chair, let alone if they’re traveling solo. Thankfully it’s literally the busiest place in the city, so at least anyone who gets hurt will get help quickly, but still.

It used to be centuries old paved stone, as stable as, well idk, something really stable. Perhaps a bit bumpy for a chair user, but honestly only a tiny bit, dad used to take lots of his customers in chairs there for coffee. He had his own taxi-van with a chair-lift in the back, that’s how I started as a taxi driver, working for him. And he started because his dad (my grandpa) had the first taxi the town I was born in. My father chose to prominently tape “Gentleman of the Road” in the back of the van. For aura farming when he wouldn’t start accelerating to speeding just because some dick was hurrying him up. He really impresses upon me the need to keep the car stable. But whenever he didn’t have customers in there, just me, it wasn’t as smooth, as he raced on the slippery backroads like the pro he was.

It sucks ass being disabled, but god damn it’s like the dumbest people get assigned to accessibility planning.

I do empathise and honestly while I criticise a ton of things about Finland, infrastructure for disabled access is really one thing I can’t help but be somewhat proud of. Let me see if I have a photo I took perhaps last year. It might be my previous phone and then it’s lost. (Actually binned my old phone by accident, a top of the line flagship phone that only had the sim-reader faulty gooooooooodammit I still blame myself so much for that fuckup.)

Oh I do have the photos, yeah.

This is an outhouse with disabled access, along a nature path of which roughly 60-70% is available with a chair. The route goes around a small lake and while it is regrettable the whole path isn’t available, I think even a majority of it being available is a win. Half of it is this well maintained gravel footpath that you can sort of see the material there, but around a third or so is really craggy forest on the beach on the other side and I’d argue the amount of nature you’d have to completely get rid off to pave that part as well, the places designation as a “nature trail” would really lose something. Mainly the view from the main side of the lake, which would affect disabled people as well.

Ah, so you just enter random discussions even when you’re not even discussing the same thing at all, while pretending to discuss the exact same thing?

I’m not being funny or trying to make fun of mental illness. You really should see a professional. I’ve got an excellent therapist myself.

See if I were to use the same level of rhetoric as you, I could just start stomping the ground and whining about how “noooo I’m not talking to you! Keep up moron!” but that would be incredibly see-through and idiotic, just like you’re being.

So, no answer to if you’re able to fly a wired drone while driving a car? Not that it matters whether it’s wired or not, you wouldn’t even be able to fly a semi-autonomous one, even though a wired one is ofc more challenging to pilot.

And again, who are you suggesting should have one in this scenario and why, and who would be flying it?

Oh wow, almost as if the fact that we are actually discussing “50-dollar flying toys” (because you not wanting that to be the case doesn’t make it so, little hunnybunny) doesn’t matter. Weird huh? Do try to keep up.

Shouldn’t’ve

There’s a lot of language that uses expressions that have something to do with sight. I noticed that when I used to drive this one blind kid to school.

And how exactly would one even back a wheelchair into that? Wheelchairs have backrests already, so you’d just hit the backrest of this bench before being on the same line as the other people sitting on it.

/sarcasm

I mean, that’s a very sweeping generalisation, which sort of ignores reality. There’s clearly a lot of protesting, and I, as I’m sure you have as well, have seen videos of people being murdered on the street to the cries of “stop resisting” even when the person didn’t do jack shit, only tried to hold on to their 1st and 4th amendment rights. And the end up under the knee of some psycho powertripper, repeating “I can’t breathe” for minutes before finally succumbing to death.

Also nowadays I believe using AI is rather more common than photoshop.

because I offered my best take at what might have been going through this person’s head

Empathy…?

So, first you imply everyone should have a drone, as “they’re a 50 dollar toy”. I ask who would be flying it and for what reason, and you refuse to specify, and then go on about how wired drones don’t need to be autonomous and start rambling on about payloads and geopolitical situations.

So you think you can fly a wired drone while you’re driving a car or doing something else and that said wired drone is a “50 dollar toy” despite you clearly describing military hardware?

Go. See. A. Mental. Health. Professional.

“No but you have to understand, All Cops might Be Bastards but they’re could be way worse bastards!”

Wow what a magnificent argument.

How do you feel about ICE arresting people for immigration offenses?

How do you feel about the DEA prosecuting people for cannabis?

Do you not understand that things are clearly immoral should lead to law enforcement refusing to enforce the laws. It doesn’t mean they get to decide which laws to enforce or not, willy nilly, but if someone says “go an arrest every minority out there” they can say ‘that’s unconstitutional and I won’t do it, you can fire me and then I’ll sue you’ or whatever it is you do there.

What you CAN’T do is become law enforcement and then use that authority while being completely arbitrary about laws.

The only reason I’m not a cop is because drugs are illegal (and some other laws but mainly those.)

TL;DR: Harry would be morally upstanding and a loose cannon (assuming he doesn’t mature past 18), therefore a “good” cop

“Loose cannons” are never good as cops. No matter how much you delude yourself they’re completely moral and even if that were 100% true they wouldn’t be good cops. Cops aren’t justice. They’re law enforcement.

Someone applying their own morality all the time instead of laws should never ever be a cop. That’s why ACAB.

a 50$ flying toy?

Drones are a tool of the modern battlefield. A tethered drone does not need to fly autonomously. Of course you can program for autonomy if you have the skills, and the autonomous task for armed resistance is not overly complicated, could be as simple as a straight line path.

Go see a psychiatrist.