Microwave brain scrambler?
in [Design]
|
From: Winston on 13 Mar 2010 00:30 On 3/12/2010 7:33 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > On 12/03/2010 23:14, Winston wrote: (...) >> Dish is concealed above the suspended ceiling, for example. >> There is no evidence it exists. (Did I mention that?) > > And it is secretly manufactured and secretly installed and nobody knows > its there except the BigMac employees, A few key employees, yes. > who are, of course, utterly loyal > and would never rat out their beloved management. Talking about that would be a career ender. Not just a job ender. Loyalty is not as strong a motivator as fear. Besides, who would listen to a disgruntled employee talk about their wild fantasy? :) >>> Lawyer for perp subpoenas all documentation on installation. >> >> No, the lawyer for the perp has no idea the transmitter exists. >> He has a crack head insisting that he was dazed for a moment, >> as if that were an unusual occurrence. :) > > And the manager can tell who's the crackhead just by looking eh? In our scenario, the crackhead was the one swinging the gun around and demanding money. Yes, I think the manager could pick him out. > Of course, it would never be used on a customer who's just pissed at the > poor service. Remember, it would only take one mistake. It'll be used on customers who are respectful, optimistic good tippers. It'll be used on folks behind the counter. Everybody except the manager will get a dose. It's a very egalitarian design. >> The lawyer for the perp is more than fully occupied. > > Lawyers are *never* fully occupied - that's why there are so many of them. Tell that to the public defender assigned to our pistol waving perp. (...) >> Yes. But the money goes to campaign contributions, not the perp's lawyer >> and certainly not the perp. > > Tell that to those who have sued such businesses on ludicrously trivial > grounds, and won. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants > > "Liebeck's attorneys argued that McDonald's coffee was "defective", > claiming that it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury > than coffee served at any other place. Moreover, McDonald's had refused > several prior opportunities to settle for less than the $640,000 > ultimately awarded." Hot coffee is evidence. Photographs of burned skin are evidence. The transmitter will leave no evidence. No evidence, no crime. > Of course, maybe you can sell this device to big restaurant chains in > Uzbekistan where political prisoners get boiled alive. No biggie there... No need. There is a huge market here in the U.S. Thank you for your thoughts, Dirk. --Winston
From: Winston on 13 Mar 2010 00:39 On 3/12/2010 7:27 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: > On 12/03/2010 22:40, Winston wrote: > >> See section #2 above. The transmitter wouldn't be used by people >> who are subject to law. Only subsidiaries of Big Business for >> whom there is no risk of prosecution attached. > > And this is in the same world where McDonalds gets sued by a customer > who spills hot coffee on herself? Other patrons had complained of the 'overheated' coffee in the past. One assumes that there were photographs of burned skin. Depositions were taken. These are evidence that support the theory that someone was harmed. The transmitter is the ultimate in plausible deniabilty. Any complainant is bound to be labeled a kook, because people will be unaware that the transmitter is being used on them. No evidence of crime means no crime could have been committed. Thanks for your thoughts, Dirk. --Winston
From: JosephKK on 13 Mar 2010 00:43 On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:40:12 -0600, AZ Nomad <aznomad.3(a)PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote: >On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 12:21:34 -0800, Winston <Winston(a)bigbrother.net> wrote: >>On 3/12/2010 10:46 AM, AZ Nomad wrote: > >>(...) > >>> As long as the workers doesn't mind the effects on themselves. >>> Such toys invariable nail the owner more than any would be thief. > >>How could that be? Who is the 'nailer'? >Doesn't matter. Invariably it is the owner or employees injured for the >simple matter that most of the time there isn't a burgler in presence >of the infernal machine. Rat chews through a control line and sets >the thing off. Drunk employee goes into the manager's office and >plays around. Owner mistakes friend of cashier. > >It doesn't matter. If you put a shotgun in the ceiling on remote >control, you're playing a very dangerous game. You missed the important text, this "Winston" finds personal amusement to be superior to any law or tort repercussions. Please respond to this "Winston" accordingly.
From: Winston on 13 Mar 2010 01:02 On 3/12/2010 9:43 PM, JosephKK wrote: (...) > You missed the important text, this "Winston" finds personal amusement > to be superior to any law or tort repercussions. Please respond > to this "Winston" accordingly. The amusement will exist. There will be no legal repercussions. There will be no evidence, no incriminating depositions. No police reports. People will be harmed by other people but no crime will be committed by definition because engineering has long since left the law behind in at least two critical ways. Something that exists is superior to something that does not exist in a sense that it can easily enter popular discussion. We discuss amusing things every day. No one is likely to talk about a lawsuit that never took place and never can take place. In that sense, I agree with you. Thanks for your input, JosephKK. --Winston
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 13 Mar 2010 01:37
On 13/03/2010 05:30, Winston wrote: > On 3/12/2010 7:33 PM, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote: >> On 12/03/2010 23:14, Winston wrote: > > (...) > >>> Dish is concealed above the suspended ceiling, for example. >>> There is no evidence it exists. (Did I mention that?) >> >> And it is secretly manufactured and secretly installed and nobody knows >> its there except the BigMac employees, > > A few key employees, yes. > >> who are, of course, utterly loyal >> and would never rat out their beloved management. > > Talking about that would be a career ender. > Not just a job ender. Loyalty is not as strong a motivator as fear. > Besides, who would listen to a disgruntled employee talk about > their wild fantasy? :) > >>>> Lawyer for perp subpoenas all documentation on installation. >>> >>> No, the lawyer for the perp has no idea the transmitter exists. >>> He has a crack head insisting that he was dazed for a moment, >>> as if that were an unusual occurrence. :) >> >> And the manager can tell who's the crackhead just by looking eh? > > In our scenario, the crackhead was the one swinging the gun around and > demanding money. Yes, I think the manager could pick him out. > >> Of course, it would never be used on a customer who's just pissed at the >> poor service. Remember, it would only take one mistake. > > It'll be used on customers who are respectful, optimistic good tippers. > It'll be used on folks behind the counter. Everybody except the > manager will get a dose. It's a very egalitarian design. > >>> The lawyer for the perp is more than fully occupied. >> >> Lawyers are *never* fully occupied - that's why there are so many of >> them. > > Tell that to the public defender assigned to our pistol waving perp. > > (...) > >>> Yes. But the money goes to campaign contributions, not the perp's lawyer >>> and certainly not the perp. >> >> Tell that to those who have sued such businesses on ludicrously trivial >> grounds, and won. >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liebeck_v._McDonald%27s_Restaurants >> >> "Liebeck's attorneys argued that McDonald's coffee was "defective", >> claiming that it was too hot and more likely to cause serious injury >> than coffee served at any other place. Moreover, McDonald's had refused >> several prior opportunities to settle for less than the $640,000 >> ultimately awarded." > > Hot coffee is evidence. Photographs of burned skin are evidence. > The transmitter will leave no evidence. No evidence, no crime. > >> Of course, maybe you can sell this device to big restaurant chains in >> Uzbekistan where political prisoners get boiled alive. No biggie there... > > No need. There is a huge market here in the U.S. > > Thank you for your thoughts, Dirk. > > --Winston No corporation would come within a mile of it. Even speculative law suits would bankrupt the company. And *thousands* of people would know about the device. Even the design of the A-bomb could not be kept secret. -- Dirk http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show |