You’re definitely on the right track.
The only actual job of the police is to file crime reports.
They do not prevent crime. Protect innocents. Make people show up for court etc. They have no obligation to stop a crime in progress or protect someone being hurt, even if they’re standing right there and could stop it.
Anything in the justice system that you value is either done by someone else, or actually isn’t done at all.
Something like “I don’t like to chat at work”.
The other suggestions seem far too inviting for follow-up or could be perceived as sidelong attacks.
That phrasing is hard to follow-up on, though not impossible, and focuses only on you. I suspect you also don’t chat with others, so they probably can’t say something like “But you chat with Johnny?”
Talking about what they’re doing that annoys you opens a conversation about them feeling attacked or maybe trying to find alternate ways to talk to you etc. You don’t need to explain why you don’t want to chat because that will open other conversations. They probably will try to follow up or redirect, but calmly insisting that you prefer not to chat may work.
HR is generally a bad place for employees to take issues since their stated job is to protect the company from liability their employees might incur. If you have a union or some other third party resource go to them first, then go to HR if they advise it. Since HR is interested in protecting the company from liability created by employees you may be able to aim them at the other employee, but you need to be sure that’s what they’ll do before going to them, otherwise they may view you as the liability.
EDIT: And you don’t need to wait for them to ask if you’re OK. If your issue is that they’re talking about non-work and that’s not why you’re there, just bring that up immediately.
And also be clear they can still talk to you as long as it’s work related, and that you’re not refusing to work with them. Otherwise you become an HR problem.
Harris chose to do something immoral because “it was the law”, or it benefited her, or whatever - and you can expect her to continue doing that.
You still have to vote for her, but you also have to be realistic about who you’re actually voting for.
Republicans are the party who holds their candidates up without criticism - and Dems put up Kamala now exactly because Democrats were criticizing Biden - and even though she’s one of the worst candidates they’ve put up in years, she’s still far more electable than Biden.
So yes. You need to both vote for and criticize Harris. It’s the least immoral choice.
I got my prependix taken out as a kid due to an infection.
Try PB&B on warm toast.
Definitely not an every day treat.
Parodying Nickelback is also wasted effort making fun of songs that are already jokes.
Now I’ve got 'er, boys.
The boss is on a roll!
Jareth seems at least a little ungay considering his infatuation with Sarah.
As for Bowie: https://youtu.be/xxIBftflGvg
I have left-hand threaded fittings on a few things and always say to myself aloud “This is reverse-threaded” before I attempt to turn them then still fuck up first turn. It doesn’t stop me from fucking it up the first time - it just helps me remember why.
When I train new people on this equipment I tell them to say it aloud, show them, still fuck up the first turn, then they laugh.
Then I have them do it in front of me including saying it aloud - and they fuck up the first turn…
When you’ve been doing something unconsciously for decades it’s really hard to break.
You should probably look up what evangelical actually means then: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evangelism
It requires proselytizing.
Outdoors are generally not protected by right to privacy, even if on private property.
Someone standing in their own front lawn can be recorded with both video and audio without their consent.
This is what makes it legal to record police.
The problem isn’t just that it will be thrown out in court, it’s that it itself is illegal.
Which doesn’t necessarily mean don’t do it but you’re limited in how you can reveal how you know things are being stolen etc.
I’d say it also needs to be entirely optional and be opt-in only. Any service, program, whatever needs to work fully for anyone who doesn’t allow their data to be sold or released with extremely few exceptions.
Better solution.
Data are owned by the generator. Only they can sell it etc…
This also solves the privacy problem of law enforcement agencies applying warrants to phone companies etc. for access to your data, which has been an end-run around 4th Amendment rights for decades.
… that looks like even more was destroyed…
Weird. I found one in seconds on Google and it’s about whether you can use the way, not the rules governing turn order while driving.
https://www.gov.uk/right-of-way-open-access-land/use-public-rights-of-way
Did you look it up before making that comment?
Must have dropped out of strawman school…