Owww!

I wouldn't consider a 30 minute stop to partially fill the tank an okay thing.

It's futurology. Dream of the solution.

It's like you forgot that machines exist and are customized to purpose.

Or do we hand carry steel beams from place to place?

Redesign so you have a dozen batteries, but smaller, and load them like rifle rounds. You can stop at a station to 'fill up'.

An attendant comes up to your car, offloads batteries, goes and exchanges them for good batteries. Then comes back and loads up the good ones. Car shuffles them as needed, you pay your bill, and off you go.

You could even automate the process with self driving cars. They pick a nearby station, go to it, lines you up with the service gantry.

An automated process goes through the whole thing. You get an option to get out of your car to go to the store (with ads) while the process is going on.

That's if you assume a single battery instead of multiple batteries.

It also assumes that you can't provide equipment to deal with additional weight.

Which is a design flaw and constraint that can be changed.

It's not possible with the 'types' of batteries we use.

If you went with smaller, replaceable batteries, that maybe aren't as efficient, then you could do it.

Edited my comment to allow for that.

Standardized shapes of car batteries plus full service stations. It would allow for you to have your battery changed out in 5 minutes and be back on the road. Plus create entry level jobs.

It would make EVs cheaper now that you know you aren't on the hook to pay tens of thousands to replace a battery.

Truck stops could have specialized systems to take care of the bigguns, or it could just be multiples of D type car batteries.

I can't tell you how many times I've been told this very thing was impossible and couldn't be done. Just design cars to have swappable batteries. Even bring back full service stations to have someone go and pull your battery and swap in a fresh one. Then take the battery and plug it into the charging station.

Universal charging points on the batteries and standardized shapes. Duracell, get on it.

I actually find the idea of human hamster wheels amusing. But it doesn't generate that much energy.

Rolling blackouts in other states.

Alternately to homicide. People will occasionally do this to keep collecting checks. Person dies of natural causes and they just conceal the body to keep collecting the check.

I need a comic of someone opening their freezer and finding Gritty staring back at them. Gritty blinks. The person closes their freezer and walks away.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/22/politics/full-jan-6-report/index.html

The full report for those who want to read it.

There are more witness transcripts to be released, as well as all of the evidence gathered.

All of which is being turned over to the Department of Justice.

Edit: Fox News has absolutely nothing on the report. This is particularly damning because just a few years ago I could get raw data from Fox News Online faster than I could CNN.

No, Treason doesn't equal death penalty. Only in time of war, and only as an option.

The criminal referrals to the DOJ will require an answer.

The Department of Justice will have to open their mouth and say Yes we will, or no we won't.

It is the cops fault for trying to stop him in the first place.

Go read the article. They lied about the helmet violation and riding on the sidewalk. They admitted that they only tried to pull him over to see if he would run.

Dude, that doesn't make a lick of sense even on the surface.

Cops break the law by attempting to pull someone over for no reason. That's the initiating action. Everything after that is the cops responsibility.

They then chase him around, again breaking policy, which is a continuing action. Probably what took it from reckless homicide to 2nd degree murder.

These are also police officers. They have reason to know better. We have reasons to EXPECT better.

tl;dr Cops do their job right - Guy doesn't die.

He's dead as a direct result of the initiating action of cops not doing their job right.

Dude, read the article. They lied about it being a valid stop. They admitted they lied.

They hit the lights to see if he would run.

They broke policy, resulting in the DEATH of a human.

They didn't flub some paperwork. A guy died.

Doctors get malpractice insurance. Lawyers get malfeasance insurance. People will insure officers also. Insurance is just covering a bet. You can always find someone to cover a bet.

Civil right violation was that he had the right to be alive. Directly due to the officers action, he isn't alive.

Also, due process. You can't randomly pull someone over because you "think" they "might" have a gun.

Long story short. We want good cops. That means we need to trust cops. Part of trusting them means knowing that if they fuck up, they will suffer consequences.

These cops fucked up, someone died, they are paying the price for their fatal fuckup.

So follow that thought.

Police should, at a minimum, have malpractice insurance, peer reviews, continuing education, and licensing boards.

In this case, because the officers lied about what they were doing, one was convicted of second-degree murder.

Both were convicted of conspiracy to obstruct and obstruction.

In addition, the city will catch a lawsuit for civil rights violations.

Maybe next time, officers in that precinct will follow policy and not lie about if they make a mistake. Or, officers can police themselves and form licensing boards, get malpractice insurance, do monthly peer reviews, and all the other things necessary to be trusted again.

Cop broke policy resulting in the death of a human. They lied to investigators about why they wanted to stop him.

If your doctor broke policy and it resulted in the death of your asshole brother in law, you'd still want the doctor to face justice.

It was a good arrest and conviction. They tried to pull him over to see if he was going to run.

They had no evidence of a crime.

The resulting chase ends in the suspects death.

It's a good thing to remind police that they need to follow the law.

>According to an indictment issued last year, Sutton violated police general orders by chasing Hylton-Brown. He and Zabavsky then intentionally misled police superiors about what happened leading up to the crash, the indictment states.

>Attorneys for the officers told the judge they were making a legal stop to investigate their suspicions that Hylton-Brown was armed.

The officers broke policy by chasing someone into traffic, where he got hit by a van and died. They then lied about why they were trying to pull him over in the first place.