It’s more than just “a man within range of vision”. Obviously we don’t have the full story here, but even in the text, there are specific behaviors that would, arguably, make a reasonable person suspect they were in imminent danger. Depending on the state, that is enough to trigger self-defense definition.

There are….others??

Reward system activates when helping other people. Why does brain not give dopamine for helping myself 😫

I’m a giant media conglomerate.

I have two facts that I intend to share in a neutral manner (and, for the case of this hypothetical, we will assume that “sharing knowledge in a 100% completely neutral, fact-based manner” is even possible).

I will call these Fact A and Fact B.

During the Super Bowl, I denote 30 seconds of airtime to Fact A, and denote only 5 seconds of airtime to Fact B.

Question: is this propaganda?

Bruh you do understand House Repubs were the ones who passed the bills that prevented Biden from stopping arms to israel right?

Also false dichotomy. Just because one side is “pro-something” doesn’t mean the other side is automatically the opposite.

Tbf, I have no idea whether coast guard would actually be liable. However, one of the coast guards’ responsibilities is rescue, so I would think if they willingly and intentionally ignored someone in obvious danger (this is very obviously dangerous), they would need to take some responsibility for anything going wrong? And I can’t blame them for not wanting to take the risk?

Even if the man sent a clear “no distress” signal, they have no idea if the man is having a mental crisis, or what other circumstances are. Even if they did know all the background information and know for 100% this dude is not in distress (again, he is in danger…I think we can all agree on that?), would you want to be the guy that made the call not to rescue him, then find out he died because of that?

I say rescue him so he doesn’t die of idiocy, and then fine him for the rescue efforts to deter future behavior?

Not sure about [x], but here’s how you do [y]

I disagree, but understand if this is what you think

Here’s something that could be provided for free. Instead of innovating, I’m going to invent a shit version of this thing, give you free access to that, and then charge for the original version.

👁️👄👁️

Why doesn’t the FDA require companies to put a range instead of an exact number then?

Not disagreeing with you; how do you suggest a way for admissions to reliably compare applicants with each other? A 3.5 at one school can mean something completely different than a 3.5 at another school.

Something like the SAT is far from perfect, but it is a way one number that means the same thing across applicants.