A spark could be enough to set them ablaze.
R e b e l s of District 13.
ravenclaws who are brilliant but fail to ever do homework
slytherins who help with temp agencies and get people into Wizarding businesses
gryffindors who do kind things anonymously instead of being knightly
hufflepuffs who speak their minds and make social change in school
Hogwarts students who defy the stereotypes of their houses while still belonging
omg look at this sex god
he has the appeal of a wet potato chip
Can’t take a chance that one day, in one spot, somewhere, an exit might appear. We can’t give up. Ever.
yknow, i’ve seen a lot of posts analyzing haru’s nightmare and rin and haru’s fight from last episode, but im honestly shocked at the lack of attention this scene has.
we’ve been seeing all season that makoto is struggling with what he wants to do when he gets out of high school. he probably never thought he’d be able to make it to the big leagues because his talent wasn’t up there with haru and rin’s. he’s jealous of rin because he could never ignite that spark in haru that rin can when they swim. haru is constantly being targeted by scouts. makoto probably feels like he’s being left behind.
but right here. this is the first time makoto is being told that his talent is worth something. even if he has decided on what he wants to do after graduation (i.e., studying in tokyo, working at the iwatobi swim club, etc.), this is the only time makoto has heard he has the potential to keep swimming. and it’s not from his best friend or his teammates or his teachers - it’s from rin.
obviously rin’s goal is to swim professionally and make it to the olympics. but up to this point makoto had assumed he was only interested in whether or not haru was taking his future into consideration. rin is also worried about makoto. not many people remember that makoto and rin are very close friends because they don’t have the same bond with each other that they both have with haru. but all season rin has been worrying about them both and rin wants them both to consider swimming professionally, not just for their future’s sake, but so he can continue swimming with his friends.
Last year, in total, British police officers actually fired their weapons three times. The number of people fatally shot was zero. In 2012 the figure was just one. Even after adjusting for the smaller size of Britain’s population, British citizens are around 100 times less likely to be shot by a police officer than Americans. Between 2010 and 2014 the police force of one small American city, Albuquerque in New Mexico, shot and killed 23 civilians; seven times more than the number of Brits killed by all of England and Wales’s 43 forces during the same period.
The explanation for this gap is simple. In Britain, guns are rare. Only specialist firearms officers carry them; and criminals rarely have access to them. The last time a British police officer was killed by a firearm on duty was in 2012, in a brutal case in Manchester. The annual number of murders by shooting is typically less than 50. Police shootings are enormously controversial. The shooting of Mark Duggan, a known gangster, which in 2011 started riots across London, led to a fiercely debated inquest. Last month, a police officer was charged with murder over a shooting in 2005. The reputation of the Metropolitan Police’s armed officers is still barely recovering from the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Menezes, an innocent Brazilian, in the wake of the 7/7 terrorist bombings in London.
In America, by contrast, it is hardly surprising that cops resort to their weapons more frequently. In 2013, 30 cops were shot and killed—just a fraction of the 9,000 or so murders using guns that happen each year. Add to that a hyper-militarised police culture and a deep history of racial strife and you have the reason why so many civilians are shot by police officers. Unless America can either reduce its colossal gun ownership rates or fix its deep social problems, shootings of civilians by police—justified or not—seem sure to continue.
—Armed police: Trigger happy | The Economist
REALEST zodiac sign stuff
self-centred competitive cunts but still sweet
nice as heck but dont show much emotions and eat a way too much
smooth lunatic manipulative assholes but geniuses
dependant, emotionally unstable lullabies and probably the nicest persons you know
most generous and selfish at the same time attention whores
steady fuckers that probably have an OCD
double-faced childish bitches but they know how to look good tho
paranoid psychos that think about dry humping all day long
funny but rude, one night stands big winner
cold-hearted motherfuckers without any social skills
weird hipsters that always try to sound deep and different but VERY open-minded
sensible compulsive liars, daydreamers and super gentle but hypocrites