dogslayeggs
The Duke one is interesting. While there was a 6% drop in Asian students at Duke, there was also a 6% increase in students not saying what their race was. The percentage of white students dropped 1%, Hispanic rose 1%, Black stayed the same, Native American stayed the same. So we really don’t know how much the Asian student population changed, since it is within the uncertainty of “refuse to identify.”
Also, I find it funny that a group that says race-based admissions is racist, is saying that since Asian student numbers went down then CLEARLY there is still race-based admissions. Because assuming Asians are the smartest and most worthy of admission is definitely not racist.
The journalist DID get the correct type of gun. The title is not written by the journalist and is the only place revolver is used.
And the way you say, “what other basic facts have they misrepresented” makes it seem like you think this was an intentional thing to skew the story. Only gun nerds will care about that detail, so the editor/copy person who actually wrote the headline likely did no research at all and just used what normal people think of as a generic term for a gun. The point is that the type of gun is not important. Just like if the person had said the officer was wearing a cotton shirt under his uniform when it was actually a poly-cotton blend, it’s not 100% accurate but it doesn’t change the point.
Where did I say none of the facts need to be correct? Nowhere, that’s where.
The important stuff needs to be clear, but the type of gun is not nearly as important as the fact the guy was restrained on the ground with a gun (any type of gun) to his head. Other facts that are more important than the type of gun are what led up to the events, whether the guy was still armed but only restrained, the color of the individuals in question, etc. The type of gun is so far down the list of details that need to be correct that I wouldn’t even expect it to be mentioned other than “gun.”
Also, even more important is the fact the story had the correct type of gun, only the title (not written by the journalist) is incorrect.
I don’t think it is an important distinction at all. The point of the news article is that an officer pointed a very lethal weapon at a person’s head while that person was restrained and (apparently the correct term is) supine. Does it really matter if the pull force for the gun to discharge or fire or whatever the preferred term is happens to be 5lbs vs 8lbs (made up numbers because I’m not a gun nerd who knows those things)? The point is exactly what you talk about in your third paragraph, not what you talk about in the first two.
It’s a distinction without meaningful difference. Yes, a revolver is very different from a semi-auto pistol. Yay, congrats on being factually correct. Are they both lethal devices that can misfire/accidentally fire/easily be fired with a trigger pull? Because THAT is the point of the article.
Local delivery vans is the most logical use of EVs I can think of.
-
Predictable range usage each day and likely within 200 miles per day.
-
Ability to charge overnight at home base each day.
-
Low maintenance for vehicles that normally experience heavy wear and tear.
-
Space for battery storage.
-
No need for high performance, which heavy batteries impact.
Thank you for the first honest criticism of this series I’ve read. Most people stubbornly support the book and say, “just push through it and enjoy the best thing ever.”
That said, characters randomly turning into dragons is actually a plus in my book. “Well shit, I guess I’m a dragon now.”
I want one because I really like swimming in pretty places, being really comfortable lounging in the sun and sleeping at night, and also going to new places all the time. I can only pick two of the three at any time without a yacht. I don’t need a mega-yacht for that, just a nice 60 footer.
For billionaires, though, it’s so they can avoid laws while doing bad shit.
