a scar for every smile
smoking did not make me feel any better at all

this is not a good sign

al-grave:

godotal:

Randomly remembering a joke and laughing about it to yourself

This fucking duck. Gets me every time.

al-grave:

godotal:

Randomly remembering a joke and laughing about it to yourself

This fucking duck. Gets me every time.

For a long time, memory researchers assumed that memories were like volumes stored in a library. When your brain remembered something, it was simply searching through the stacks and then reading aloud from whatever passage it discovered. But some scientists now believe that memories effectively get rewritten every time they’re activated, thanks to a process called reconsolidation. To create a synaptic connection between two neurons the associative link that is at the heart of all neuronal learning you need protein synthesis. Studies on rats suggest that if you block protein synthesis during the execution of learned behavior pushing a lever to get food, for instance the learned behavior disappears. It appears that instead of simply recalling a memory that had been forged days or months ago, the brain is forging it all over again, in a new associative context. In a sense, when we remember something, we create a new memory, one that is shaped by the changes that have happened to our brain since the memory last occurred to us.

Slate Magazine, “The Science of Eternal Sunshine by Steven, March 22, 2004

(via evoketheforms)

my seventh grade english teacher made our class do a study on this

(via rumbox)

always apologize but never be sorry
advice I got from a dunkin donuts employee one time - literallygoth (via perfect)
Sometimes, ya need a drink to finish off a Monday proper

Sometimes, ya need a drink to finish off a Monday proper

adrianandrews:

My brother is looking for a job

adrianandrews:

My brother is looking for a job

favoritelittlelyrics:

Fastball, “Out Of My Head”

favoritelittlelyrics:

Fastball, “Out Of My Head”

malcolmxinadress:

thinksquad:

The California Supreme Court has ruled that the silence of suspects can be used against them.
Wading into a legally tangled vehicular manslaughter case, a sharply divided high court on Thursday effectively reinstated the felony conviction of a man accused in a 2007 San Francisco Bay Area crash that left an 8-year-old girl dead and her sister and mother injured.
Richard Tom was sentenced to seven years in prison for manslaughter after authorities said he was speeding and slammed into another vehicle at a Redwood City intersection.
Prosecutors repeatedly told jurors during the trial that Tom’s failure to ask about the victims immediately after the crash but before police read him his so-called Miranda rights showed his guilt.
Legal analysts said the ruling could affect future cases, allowing prosecutors to exploit a suspect’s refusal to talk before invoking 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination.
"It’s a bad and questionable decision," said Dennis Fischer, a longtime criminal appellate lawyer.
Tom’s attorney Marc Zilversmit said he is deciding whether to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue or renew his arguments in the state court of appeal.
"It’s a very dangerous ruling," Zilversmit said. "If you say anything to the police, that can be used against you. Now, if you don’t say anything before you are warned of your rights, that too can be used against you."
The state Supreme Court in a 4-3 ruling said Tom needed to explicitly assert his right to remain silent — before he was read his Miranda rights — for the silence to be inadmissible in court.
http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/court-silence-can-be-used-against-suspects

nigga what?

i’m gonna read the actual ruling for the details because no one ever interprets law right fucking ever
but if this is at all true this is some of the biggest fucking bullshit we’ve had and we have had some serious moldy legal balogne the last 10 years

malcolmxinadress:

thinksquad:

The California Supreme Court has ruled that the silence of suspects can be used against them.

Wading into a legally tangled vehicular manslaughter case, a sharply divided high court on Thursday effectively reinstated the felony conviction of a man accused in a 2007 San Francisco Bay Area crash that left an 8-year-old girl dead and her sister and mother injured.

Richard Tom was sentenced to seven years in prison for manslaughter after authorities said he was speeding and slammed into another vehicle at a Redwood City intersection.

Prosecutors repeatedly told jurors during the trial that Tom’s failure to ask about the victims immediately after the crash but before police read him his so-called Miranda rights showed his guilt.

Legal analysts said the ruling could affect future cases, allowing prosecutors to exploit a suspect’s refusal to talk before invoking 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

"It’s a bad and questionable decision," said Dennis Fischer, a longtime criminal appellate lawyer.

Tom’s attorney Marc Zilversmit said he is deciding whether to petition the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the issue or renew his arguments in the state court of appeal.

"It’s a very dangerous ruling," Zilversmit said. "If you say anything to the police, that can be used against you. Now, if you don’t say anything before you are warned of your rights, that too can be used against you."

The state Supreme Court in a 4-3 ruling said Tom needed to explicitly assert his right to remain silent — before he was read his Miranda rights — for the silence to be inadmissible in court.

http://news.msn.com/crime-justice/court-silence-can-be-used-against-suspects

nigga what?

i’m gonna read the actual ruling for the details because no one ever interprets law right fucking ever

but if this is at all true this is some of the biggest fucking bullshit we’ve had and we have had some serious moldy legal balogne the last 10 years

i am missing something in my life and i’m not sure what it is