Youtube comments of TheGreatIndoors1979 (@TheGreatIndoors1979).
-
2500
-
979
-
385
-
259
-
258
-
257
-
238
-
114
-
114
-
112
-
106
-
89
-
81
-
79
-
71
-
68
-
66
-
66
-
63
-
62
-
53
-
46
-
46
-
44
-
43
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
35
-
34
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
18
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
"I personally wonder when the EV technology will become safe and more affordable."
Never for cars. Lithium-ion is pretty much the technological zenith for batteries. And like most battery-variants, it comes with its plusses and minuses 😌 and thus, with its own niche of applications for which the battery is most suited. For lithium-ion, these are small devices like tablets and phones. For electric bikes, you are pushing the limits, but it is still reasonable from an economic and safety perspective (the latter depending on the kind of manufacturer).
Small urban electric cars would probably be better off with a different kind of battery, which would make their range very limited (hence urban only), their charging speed slower, and also heavier in weight, in comparison to similar sized lithion-ion cars. But at least they would not be a fire hazard, which is a big plus within an urban environment. However, I doubt if most people would consider purchasing such a vehicle as a second car. Maybe only in really congested areas.
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@squdardt.9719
"Consumer Reports removed Model 3 from its recommended cars list in February 2019 due to its problematic body hardware and trim. Paint is chipping off new northern European Model 3s, the cars likely having been tested only on California highways in fair weather."
"Norway’s Dagens Næringsliv reported that within one year, Tesla fell from fourth to 51st place in customer satisfaction, due to consistently low quality and lack of adequate customer service. Rental buyers, a customer bracket into which Tesla could offload much inventory in times of need, are experiencing massive problems, not only in China, but also in Europe. EC-Rent from the Netherlands had to abandon their Tesla rental fleet “due to increasing technical defects and the lack of a fast delivery of parts from Tesla, we had to halt half of our Teslas in our rental fleet from mid-December. Since this is no longer tenable and a solution does not seem to be within reach, our activities are currently discontinued.” Umeå Eltaxi in northern Sweden went bankrupt over the lack and cost of Tesla service."
"In part due to the company’s amateur approach to automation and production, the quality of cars shipped to China remains as problematic as elsewhere. Chinese customers are showing their growing discontent with Tesla’s susceptibility to defects and sub-par service offering. This year, already three Model S spontaneously caught fire, two at a Shanghai charger and Shanghai underground car park and one at a Hong Kong shopping mall car park. A Chengdu rental and taxi company operating 278 Model S and X became so displeased it took out large billboard adverts in New York’s Times Square to demand proper service and compensation for losses occurred, many cars not properly repaired for over a year."
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
"I've learned the term 'the Peter Pans', you know, the men who will never grow up. They maybe educated men who have money and so forth, but they want to play around and have a lot of fun and may not partner at all..."
Remember, it doesn't matter if you are succesful in your career, or if you are self-reliant or not - if you don't marry, you are not 'a grown man'.
'Real man', 'Grown man', 'Alpha man'. These are all labels I don't have any use for, nor care about.
Just do what you can do in your own life, and what suits you best, on your own terms.
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@squdardt.9719
"Early February 2019, a $35,000 RWD standard range went on sale, in order for the company to be able to claim that it eventually achieved offering a mass-market Model 3. However, that version was on sale only six weeks and is since then sold only by telephone call or in-store appointment. This low-end version soon metamorphosed into an RWD standard range plus."
"Meanwhile, as of May, Tesla begun to exploit Canadian subsidy regulations by offering a 93 mile limited bare-bones Model 3 RWD standard range that slips under the $45,000 (Canadian) threshold by a single dollar. In doing so, the $53,700 RWD standard range plus is now eligible for the $5,000 subsidy, because it's considered a “trim level” of the base model. Like in the U.S., the 93-mile version can only be ordered by phone or via in-store appointment, the regular model however is available on-line. This interpretation of regulatory loopholes is in line with Tesla exploiting the California ZEV credit regulations by way of theoretical battery swap station functionality of Model S and exploiting the German subsidy regulations by offering a bare-bones Model S below the subsidy threshold that was then lifted to higher ASPs by customers having to order what used to be standard trim as extras."
In other words, those base-price models are just a talking point, meant to make use of subsidy-regulation loopholes, not meant as a serious option for customers.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
From an article called 'Tesla pivots to oblivion':
"Model 3 operating cost savings, one of Tesla’s most prominent sales arguments besides straight-line acceleration, do not materialise for many Europeans: The Model 3 SR+ with 415km range starts at €45,480, which is over €13,000 more compared to the Škoda Octavia Premium 2.0 TDI that features more options, better interior and a higher fit and finish quality. The Model 3 uses 20kWh per 100km driven in mild weather on city and country roads, which means that at €0,29 cost of domestic electricity per kWh in Germany – Tesla’s own charger cost per kWh being higher – the cost per 100km is €5.8, whereas the Škoda uses 5.3l diesel per 100km under the same conditions. At a cost of €1.24 per litre diesel, the cost per 100km is €6.6. At an average of 15,000km driven per year, the operating cost difference is a mere €120 per year and is further diminished in the cold and winter weather season via battery pre-heating and battery discharge, as well as via higher insurance and repair costs."
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
Hi Michael,
I believe in equal rights for men and women and I am, partly for that reason, not a feminist. I'm quite aware of the general dictionary's description of feminism, but that doesn't say anything about their activities and behavior. You will find that most people don't want to call themselves feminists, even though they will probably agree with the dictionary's definition, because of the stigma the word feminist already has in the general public.
Basically, to call yourself a feminist, you must believe in patriarchy theory. That is the very basis of feminism, like someone who believes in the resurrection of Jesus Christ is a christian. I, on the other hand, don't believe in patriarchy theory, and therefore can't call myself a feminist. (Nor would I want to. What's wrong with calling yourself an equalitarian?)
And then you have things like: rape culture, the wage gap and gender quota's, the 1-in-4 rape statistics etc., which are all phenomena that can be debated (which it has been already).
However, returning to Viv's book, MinSinging's comment just made me curious about what she had to say personally about feminism. Does it play a great part in her memoir, or is it something that remains in the background?
Thanks.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@thesmallestdaltonbrother2176 "I don't care about any article stating they don't like Teslas."
Implying that the article I referenced states that, is a lie that can be easily checked: https://outline.com/S3eRCg
No, what the article is saying, among other things, is that EV's, and mainly BEV's like Tesla's only seem to garner sales, in places in Europe like Norway and The Netherlands for example, when government intervenes in the transportation section with subsidies, taxbreaks and the like. Thus, disproving your view that 'going electric is simply the better option', because the consumer market simply isn't reflecting this notion.
Furthermore, they outline the erratic business behaviours of Musk and his BOD, and the overall financial health of the company based on multiple consumer reports, feedback from their business-to-business partners worldwide and their financial records (matching those financial outcomes with the predictions Musk made in the past).
All reasonable things to point out.
4
-
@zefnoly9147 "Ask norway. Electric cars dont suck here at all and people buy them at plenty. Search "norway EV success". "
How about these articles?:
https://cleantechnica.com/2018/05/01/denmark-rethinks-ev-incentives-after-market-collapses/
Some quotes:
"Denmark has no domestic auto manufacturing, so every car purchased is imported from somewhere else — and pays an import tax that can go as high at 180%. The Danes may be happy but they still make buying decisions like everyone else. Until recently, registration fees for new electric cars were waived, which made them very attractive to Danish buyers. (This is very similar to a key policy in Norway as well, where there are high taxes on cars but electric cars are exempted.)"
"Then, in 2015, the Liberal government of Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen decided to end the incentives over a period of years until registration fees for EVs and conventional cars reached parity in 2022. The reason for the change was a case of simple economics leavened with a dose of free market principles.
The incentives were costing the government a lot of money and it was never intended that electric cars would get a free ride forever."
"Now, the Social Democrat party has announced it proposes to ban the sale of new diesel-powered cars if it wins control of the government in the next elections, scheduled for June 2019. Partly as a result of that announcement, Rasmussen now says, “We have tax incentives for electric cars, and you could discuss if they should be bigger. I will not exclude that.”
"
"The new incentives, whatever they are, will be made public this summer as part of a larger $2 billion plan to boost renewable energy consumption."
"In Sweden, which has had a stable system of incentives for electric car buyers, the sale of EVs is going up steadily, if not quite as rapidly as in neighboring Norway, which now has nearly 50% of all car sales being sales of electric cars. "
Over to Norway then...
https://cleantechnica.com/2017/10/14/norway-considers-tesla-tax-electric-cars/
Quotes:
"Norway confers a number of other benefits on electric car owners, among them free charging in many cities, access to HOV lanes, and reduced tolls for the country’s many bridges and tunnels. Taken together, they make buying an electric car a no-brainer.
"
"But all those subsidies cost the government a lot of money in lost revenue every year."
"It is regrettable that Norway is considering pulling back on some of the programs and incentives that make purchasing an electric car so popular..."
"Still, it is a signal that the benefits electric car buyers currently enjoy won’t last forever. In fact, many of them are scheduled to lapse in 2020 anyway as the country struggles to find the proper balance between promoting electric cars and fiscal responsibility."
Looks like the main reason people are buying EV's in Scandinavia, are because of heavy financial incentives brought upon by their respective governments. The same conclusion has also been made in the other article I mentioned in this thread, 'Tesla pivots to oblivion': https://outline.com/S3eRCg
How much of an effect these incentives have to these countries, might be best displayed with a final quote from the first article:
"If you drive east from Copenhagen across the Kattegat toward Sweden, you can tell where the border is between the two countries. The waters off the coast of Denmark are thick with wind turbines. The coast of Sweden has none, as in zero. The differences between the renewable energy policies of the two neighboring countries couldn’t be more stark.'
In other words, this isn't the free market who's at work. It's Big Brother. Almost exclusively.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lewreed1871 RedFem Collective: Will heterosexuality survive women’s liberation?
Bindel: It won’t, not unless men get their act together, have their power taken from them and behave themselves. I mean, I would actually put them all in some kind of camp where they can all drive around in quad bikes, or bicycles, or white vans. I would give them a choice of vehicles to drive around with, give them no porn, they wouldn’t be able to fight – we would have wardens, of course! Women who want to see their sons or male loved ones would be able to go and visit, or take them out like a library book, and then bring them back.
I hope heterosexuality doesn’t survive, actually. I would like to see a truce on heterosexuality. I would like an amnesty on heterosexuality until we have sorted ourselves out. Because under patriarchy it’s shit.
And I am sick of hearing from individual women that their men are all right. Those men have been shored up by the advantages of patriarchy and they are complacent, they are not stopping other men from being shit.
I would love to see a women’s liberation that results in women turning away from men and saying: “when you come back as human beings, then we might look again.”
Source: https://web.archive.org/web/20150904155320/http://www.radfemcollective.org/news/2015/8/29/an-interview-with-julie-bindel
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1ynx "The claims of religions are, as far as I know, never restricted to merely asserting that some vaque, powerfull being exists."
It is however the main claim of which all other claims are derived.
"If the hypothetical existence of a God is grounded on these claims, it becomes quite reasonable to state 'there is no God (based on these assertions)."
It is quite clear that the statement "there is no god." is a reaction to the central claim (namely the existence of some vague, powerful being), and not a reaction to the nature of reality. This should quite obvious.
"It is impossible to prove a negative with direct evidence, which is always gleefully mentioned by both religious people and PC agnostics."
False. It is impossible to prove a negative, period.
"I don't get the idea you are religious,..."
I'm not, I'm an agnostic atheist.
"...so I don't really get why consider this detail so important."
Because people like you seem to be unable to grasp the concept that the impossibility of proving a negative, negates the positive claim of the nonexistence of god.
Now, there might be atheists out there who will in all honesty say: "There is no god." This just negates the notion that atheists are all intelligent people.
Furthermore, you might have noticed a distinction between the politics of fundamental theists (who more often than not claim to have a personal connection to their spiritual leader) and those who have a vague belief in a diety and belief in concepts as faith but simultaneously have an understanding of the benefits of the separation between church and state. More often than not, the latter group seem to be more tolerant of other viewpoints.
If this true about dogmatic theists, than I do not see why this could not be true about dogmatic atheists.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Dueilangoisseus "Only full-electric vehicles in Norway don't pay tolls erected on city boundaries..."
"Norway is an oil-rich economy that does allow for high wages, but the real push toward luxury electric vehicles (EVs) has been made possible by a huge sales tax exemption."
"Bent Erik Bakken, a senior principal scientist at the global assurance and risk management company DNV GL, told CNBC via telephone that Norwegian taxes on full petrol cars are about 100 percent, thus doubling the showroom price. So then you just take that away for electric vehicles and suddenly EVs in Norway are, on average, cheaper," he said."
"Denmark illustrates why subsidies are not only important to EV growth but also retain existing market appetite. For a long time, electric car buyers were spared the 180 percent import tax that Denmark applies to vehicles fueled by an internal combustion engine."
"Under pressure from traditional manufacturers, those tax breaks were originally set to be phased out from 2016 to 2020. But as soon as the new regime was introduced in the first three months of 2016, sales of electric vehicles dropped from nearly 2,500 units to just over 200."
[Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/30/norway-where-the-electric-tesla-has-become-the-budget-option.html]
^ Like I said, no viable EV market, but I guess everything will become self-supportive in 2022, somehow. We shall see.
Oh, and the reason why your Norway is so wealthy in the first place, is because all of those other countries 'being stuck in the 70's'.
ABBA music intensifies
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cloudoftime "I get to speak on behalf of myself... ...I can speak for whoever the hell I want."
:roll-eyes: So you get to speak on behalf of yourself AND of others. Well sure you CAN, I wasn't claiming you CAN't. But it does make you look like a bit of an asshole.
"Do you know how the senate works? When you say the "people have voted for a majority Republican Senate", do you even know what you're talking about?"
The current majority republican Senate is the result of the American public casting their votes in the past elections. This should not be a difficult thing to grasp.
"Yeah, 2 per state. Not a majority vote."
So there we have it, you do not like the rules of the system because of the results you got. How unsurprising. The U.S. does not have a direct democracy. Deal with it.
By the way, your ideological equals in the U.K. didn't accept the results of the majority vote with regard to Brexit either when they didn't got their way. And so, they started moaning about the difference not being large enough. Same pattern of behavior.
"And I never said nothing was happening by the rules, you fool."
Nor did I claim that. But you are throwing a temper tantrum when the things happening by the rules aren't to your liking.
"The Republicans blocked Obama's nominee, claiming that the next president should be determined before an SJC is picked, And now they are hypocritically going back on that in this situation."
And all of this is happening exactly within the confines of the rules. Which is, I repeat, all that matters.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Slater Slater "Hennepin County Medical Examiner’s report found that George Floyd died from cardiopulmonary arrest, not from strangulation. Notice, I am not saying that George Floyd had a heart attack; he did not. His heart stopped beating, and he stopped breathing. He was not strangled, though.
Given that the prosecution’s theory is that the officers asphyxiated him by restraining him, this finding is extremely damaging to their case because that could have happened without the restraint, and the examiner’s report provides no actual facts to back up the claim that the restraint caused the cardiac and pulmonary arrest. Remember, though, the defense does not have to prove anything; the prosecution must prove everything.
This leads to our second reason, which is that the medical examiner found no life threatening injuries. Again, if the officers did not inflict a life threatening injury to Mr. Floyd, it is awfully hard to convince a fair jury that the officers murdered him. It is very rare to have a successful murder charge without a life threatening injury. The second degree murder charges requires the prosecution prove that Officer Chauvin injured Mr. Floyd AND that he intended to harm Mr. Floyd. As I have previously pointed out, the prosecution has a very weak case on intent. It also has a hard case, now, with causation because there were no injuries that could have caused his death.
Third, injuries were found, but they appear to be self-inflicted. The medical examination found that Mr. Floyd had injuries to his wrists and face. The complaints never allege that the officers ever struck Mr. Floyd or did anything else that would have caused that harm. However, the newly released transcripts from the bodycams show that Mr. Floyd harmed himself. In fact, it was his self harm that caused the officers to put him on the ground. They did so to prevent him from inflicting additional harm to himself and called an ambulance to treat these injuries.
This particular finding is quite damaging to the prosecution because it shows the officers’ intent. Their intent was not to harm Mr. Floyd or to even be indifferent to his safety. Instead, their intent was to get him treatment and prevent him from hurting himself. Given that, it makes it very difficult for the prosecution to prove that Officer Chauvin intended to harm Mr. Floyd, which is an essential element of the second degree murder charge.
What is more, these injuries are consistent with the concern the officers raised at the time, which is that Mr. Floyd was having a “excited delirium.” An excited delirium is a potentially fatal condition commonly brought on by drug abuse and results in the victim acting irrationally and fighting everyone who attempts to help that person, which is exactly what we see with Mr. Floyd.
This brings us to the fourth reason the medical examiner’s report is very difficult for the prosecution, namely that Mr. Floyd had overdosed on Fentanyl. Mr. Floyd had 11 ng/mL of Fentanyl in his blood. Fatal doses start at 3 ng/mL. In other words, he had almost 4 times the potentially lethal limit.
What is more, Mr. Floyd was a veritable pharmacy. He also had methamphetamine, morphine, and marijuana in his system. That is a whole lot of drugs.
Despite all the evidence showing that Mr. Floyd’s drug abuse caused his heart to give out, the medical examiner still found this was a homicide. Candidly, it appears that finding was political. There is quite literally nothing in the report that would seem to justify that kind of finding."
So despite all the evidence pointing to the contrary, the medical examiner concluded it was homicide. Of course, there couldn't have been any political pressure being directed to this examiner that could've influenced his final verdict, surely.
source: https://www.reifflawoffice.com/blog/about-those-george-floyd-medical-examinations/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1