Funny Pictures Thread. It begins again

Reactions
748 42 1
A few times a week I walk past a sign that reads. NO HOSTAGES BEYOND THIS POINT.

Freaked me the hell out the first time I read that.

I just imagine the guards would be as likely to shoot me as the offender.
Honestly, it makes a lot of psychological sense: as much as we, as a society, hem and hah about needing to protect hostages from harm... police officers know that there is a signifigant likelihood that they will evade punishment if they harm innocent people but a strong likelihood that they will lose their jobs if they don't bring down the perpetrators or allow them to entrench. So why wouldn't they shoot the hostage? It's not like they care about them.

This is what happens when military sensibilities slip into law enforcement and the system refuses to correct it.
 
Reactions
2,049 605 23
Tomayto, tomahto.
Or: I really don't see how that distinction matters, Pat.
Military mindset: "That guy over there doing that thing is one of them and presents a threat to us and therefore must be neutralized."
(Ideal) Law enforcement mindset: "That guy over there doing that thing is one of us who is transgressing and must be dealt with."

I'd draw up a Venn diagram, but it should be pretty obvious. The military presupposition is that "they" are not "us" and in fact are a threat to us and so "we" don't feel compelled to treat them like human beings. A law enforcement officer who maintains the mentality that we are "at war" with criminals is much more likely to do something (s)he shouldn't when encountering one, and the constant reinforcement of the "us v. them" behavior also contributes to things like the blue wall, etc.
A law enforcement officer who remembers both parties are human beings is also more likely to remember that criminals can panic, can get scared, have families, etc., and take that behavior into account rather than just focusing on grounding and pounding a perp into submission.

Pedantic, sure, but asshole is just personal opinion.
I mainly see the label as a justification to dismiss what I say out of hand rather than being forced to question one's stance.

--Patrick
 
Reactions
2,049 605 23
Ah, yes. Good ol’ Dennis “Single Point of Failure” Nedry.

“Hey, Moneybags! Basic opsec suggests you should hire two admins in case something bad happens!”
<looks around>
“See? Nobody cares.”

—Patrick
 
Reactions
742 208 0
Hammond: Dennis…our lives are in your hands, and you have butterfingers?
Dennis Nedry: [laughs] I am totally unappreciated in my time. You could run this whole park from this room with minimal staff for up to three days. You think that kind of automation is easy? [sips a soda] Or cheap? You know anybody who can network eight Connection Machines and debug two million lines of code for what I bid for this job? Because if he can, I'd like to see him try.
Hammond: I am sorry about your financial problems, Dennis, I really am, but they are your problems.
Dennis Nedry: You're right, John, you're absolutely right. You know, everything is my problem.
Hammond: I will not be drawn into another financial debate with you, Dennis, I really will not!
Dennis Nedry: There'd be hardly any debate at all.
Hammond: I don't blame people for their mistakes…but I do ask that they pay for them.
Dennis Nedry: [sarcastically] Thanks, Dad.

So, basically, it sounds like Hammond was paying Nedry the amount Nedry bid for the contract, which is fair, but Hammond was also being a dick in the process, which probably pushed Nedry towards stealing embryos.
 
Hammond: Dennis…our lives are in your hands, and you have butterfingers?
Dennis Nedry: [laughs] I am totally unappreciated in my time. You could run this whole park from this room with minimal staff for up to three days. You think that kind of automation is easy? [sips a soda] Or cheap? You know anybody who can network eight Connection Machines and debug two million lines of code for what I bid for this job? Because if he can, I'd like to see him try.
Hammond: I am sorry about your financial problems, Dennis, I really am, but they are your problems.
Dennis Nedry: You're right, John, you're absolutely right. You know, everything is my problem.
Hammond: I will not be drawn into another financial debate with you, Dennis, I really will not!
Dennis Nedry: There'd be hardly any debate at all.
Hammond: I don't blame people for their mistakes…but I do ask that they pay for them.
Dennis Nedry: [sarcastically] Thanks, Dad.

So, basically, it sounds like Hammond was paying Nedry the amount Nedry bid for the contract, which is fair, but Hammond was also being a dick in the process, which probably pushed Nedry towards stealing embryos.
Alternatively, Nedry's in a bad contract because he bid for this contract without knowing all the details and would have asked for far, far more if he'd known that the job came with the risk of being eaten by dinosaurs. We know people have died setting up the park, we see it in the intro and Hammond doesn't tell any of the others about it (and neither does Muldoon).
 
Reactions
580 79 5
We know from several other instances that Hammond's a bit stingy on the details, so yeah, Nedry probably bid less than he should have for the job. The book explains that Hammond is basically a showman - all flash, all style, but the substance behind the scenes is a lot messier. He was a step or two ahead of being a con-man, except he made something terrifyingly real.
 
Top