Over here in Germany I can get an Uzi and more than I can carry in rounds for
2000 EUR. How many people do you think I can kill within 15 mins. with a light
machine gun like the Uzi?
Not many. Automatic fire - unless you are well-trained and in control, is HIGHLY inaccurate. It's very hard to control a weapon while firing on full auto. Crazy people - unless they spent a lot of time practicing will use their ammo up quickly.
Over in the US none of the legal weapons available in stores are automatic nor are easily converted back to automatic operation. How many people can I kill in half and hour with a legal weapon?
More than with full auto.
Downplaying the angle that with gun bans only criminals have guns regularily leads
your argumentation down that blind alley. Try something new, like studying the issue.
Try refuting it. LESS than one percent of gun owners in America use a gun in a crime, and most guns used in crimes are cheap pieces of crap bought (illegally) on the street or stolen.
No, these kind of things don't happen where students and/or professors are given the ability and permission to defend themselves. How many teachers, I wonder, who are somewhat pro-gun, now keep a gun hidden away just in case? I considered it when I was a grad assistant.
Thank you for not posting AC for this unintelligent drivel, so you could be properly modded down.
Try going back and maybe getting some education on guns before you do this again, it would do you and everyone else a favor. Guns cause such an emotional reaction from both sides of the aisle that it becomes VERY hard to have intelligent discussions on the matter.
Highly unlikely, especially for that day and age. Remember, true modern democracy was practically unheard of, and what the Founding Fathers were doing was considered treasonous at the time. It wasn't the 20th or 21st century, where democracy was expected and encouraged.
Has anyone ever got the sinking feeling that Gates and Jobs have been pulling the wool over our eyes with their "rivalry" for 30 years? Blatant cooperation on such a scale would have been even MORE monopolistic than Microsoft is now, and such competition has always been good press. I say they've had a weekly phone conversation since their supposed "split." Pirates of Silicon Valley, indeed.
Am I making sense, or is this just pure flamebait?
I'm not pleased, either. I can understand the reasoning - high workloads can lead to burnout - but I concur with other posters. Let someone else do it...Doctor Who stories tend to benefit from fresh ideas and it can reasonably go in nearly ANY direction.
The current version has even managed to do a decent re-vamping of Daleks and Cybermen (when most re-hashings of old ideas tend to get tired). There is PLENTY more to do with this show...heck, remember that not only are there more incarnations left, we also have however long the FIRST doctor was around before his debut as an old geezer in a junkyard.
It IS a good formula for generating interest - "leave 'em wanting more" rather than getting stale (which, by the way, it wasn't at the end of its first run - internal issues in the Beeb got it canceled, not poor ratings or lack of interest).
Hey, Beeb, there's a SciFi channel out there doing reruns...and there are plenty of shows that should have found a second/third life there (Firefly is a three-four season show on SciFi, easily...and it's one of the few places US audiences can watch any Doctor Who that isn't internet).
An armed citizenship, willing to protect itself, can, has, and will do this same job just as, if not more, effectively. It is why a plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania rather than another building in DC. It is why we have caught a handful of wannabe terrorists on our own soil.
If we are willing and able to defend ourselves on our own soil, we don't need constant monitoring. If we depend on government agencies, we won't do so well.
You've hit the real issue - allowing competition and not subsidizing the dang companies. Many anti-capitalist and anti-right-wing arguments fail on this account - there are a good many companies which the free market WOULD work out a better choice were there an actual level playing field - no subsidies (farming), everyone getting the same/similar tax breaks (pick your favorite billion-dollar corporation), no legislated monopolies (cable), allowing actual consumer input (health insurance).
An assassin today wouldn't use an outdated gun. He'd use an automatic, if available (Uzis come to mind) and spray his target. Or he would use a weapon with greater impact.
Wow, you watch too many movies, and know too little about guns. Fully auto spraying is the least accurate form of shooting a gun that EXISTS. It isn't worth the time or effort to get a fully automatic firearm for such a purpose, anyway - they're illegal unless you have a special permit that is expensive and impossible to get, and too dang easy to track if you DO have one illegally.
A silenced.22 would have done the job. An assassin MIGHT use a larger caliber.
The real question about supporting life is not only breathable air, but also the surrounding belts that insulate a planet from intense radiation. Ozone layer, Van Allen Belts, and the like are just as - if not more important - than a breathable atmosphere.
PLUS planet tilt.
And distance.
And possibly rotation speed.
I'm not saying that life exists anywhere else...just that the odds are against it. Maybe.
It may come down to the same problem with spandex and super-heroes. Other than Spider-man, Spandex rarely does well on screen - leather and looser clothing tends to look less dumb.
TF may be the same way...the principle that the original toys were based on was that you could create either a good-looking car/plane or a good looking robot, but not both. The toy makers (Hasbro and its predecessors in Japan) went the car route...there wasn't an extremely good robot/car until the 20th anniversary Optimus Prime...and that truck isn't much on the road anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
We would definitely be a heck of a lot more careful about what we said.
Over here in Germany I can get an Uzi and more than I can carry in rounds for 2000 EUR. How many people do you think I can kill within 15 mins. with a light machine gun like the Uzi?
Not many. Automatic fire - unless you are well-trained and in control, is HIGHLY inaccurate. It's very hard to control a weapon while firing on full auto. Crazy people - unless they spent a lot of time practicing will use their ammo up quickly.
Over in the US none of the legal weapons available in stores are automatic nor are easily converted back to automatic operation. How many people can I kill in half and hour with a legal weapon?
More than with full auto.
Downplaying the angle that with gun bans only criminals have guns regularily leads your argumentation down that blind alley. Try something new, like studying the issue.
Try refuting it. LESS than one percent of gun owners in America use a gun in a crime, and most guns used in crimes are cheap pieces of crap bought (illegally) on the street or stolen.
No, these kind of things don't happen where students and/or professors are given the ability and permission to defend themselves. How many teachers, I wonder, who are somewhat pro-gun, now keep a gun hidden away just in case? I considered it when I was a grad assistant.
Thank you for not posting AC for this unintelligent drivel, so you could be properly modded down.
Try going back and maybe getting some education on guns before you do this again, it would do you and everyone else a favor. Guns cause such an emotional reaction from both sides of the aisle that it becomes VERY hard to have intelligent discussions on the matter.
Highly unlikely, especially for that day and age. Remember, true modern democracy was practically unheard of, and what the Founding Fathers were doing was considered treasonous at the time. It wasn't the 20th or 21st century, where democracy was expected and encouraged.
QQ PVP server L2P noob.
Veni, Vidi, Vici
The price drop was the first thing that I thought about...cheap RAM time again! I love economics.
I SEE JOHN CARTER! I SEE JOHN CARTER!!
Ooh, and Ransom is over there with the giant manatee-things...
Ummm...someone needs to toss Arnie a oxygen mask, or something, his eyes look funny...
And what are those funny-looking explosions...ah, nothing, just volcanoes.
Has anyone ever got the sinking feeling that Gates and Jobs have been pulling the wool over our eyes with their "rivalry" for 30 years? Blatant cooperation on such a scale would have been even MORE monopolistic than Microsoft is now, and such competition has always been good press. I say they've had a weekly phone conversation since their supposed "split." Pirates of Silicon Valley, indeed.
Am I making sense, or is this just pure flamebait?
Here's a shot in the dark. Gates' credit limit is higher than yours.
I'm not pleased, either. I can understand the reasoning - high workloads can lead to burnout - but I concur with other posters. Let someone else do it...Doctor Who stories tend to benefit from fresh ideas and it can reasonably go in nearly ANY direction.
The current version has even managed to do a decent re-vamping of Daleks and Cybermen (when most re-hashings of old ideas tend to get tired). There is PLENTY more to do with this show...heck, remember that not only are there more incarnations left, we also have however long the FIRST doctor was around before his debut as an old geezer in a junkyard.
It IS a good formula for generating interest - "leave 'em wanting more" rather than getting stale (which, by the way, it wasn't at the end of its first run - internal issues in the Beeb got it canceled, not poor ratings or lack of interest).
Hey, Beeb, there's a SciFi channel out there doing reruns...and there are plenty of shows that should have found a second/third life there (Firefly is a three-four season show on SciFi, easily...and it's one of the few places US audiences can watch any Doctor Who that isn't internet).
An armed citizenship, willing to protect itself, can, has, and will do this same job just as, if not more, effectively. It is why a plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania rather than another building in DC. It is why we have caught a handful of wannabe terrorists on our own soil.
If we are willing and able to defend ourselves on our own soil, we don't need constant monitoring. If we depend on government agencies, we won't do so well.
You've hit the real issue - allowing competition and not subsidizing the dang companies. Many anti-capitalist and anti-right-wing arguments fail on this account - there are a good many companies which the free market WOULD work out a better choice were there an actual level playing field - no subsidies (farming), everyone getting the same/similar tax breaks (pick your favorite billion-dollar corporation), no legislated monopolies (cable), allowing actual consumer input (health insurance).
Free markets typically work themselves out well.
We HAVE our Halo movie.
Red Vs. Blue, baby!
An assassin today wouldn't use an outdated gun. He'd use an automatic, if available (Uzis come to mind) and spray his target. Or he would use a weapon with greater impact. Wow, you watch too many movies, and know too little about guns. Fully auto spraying is the least accurate form of shooting a gun that EXISTS. It isn't worth the time or effort to get a fully automatic firearm for such a purpose, anyway - they're illegal unless you have a special permit that is expensive and impossible to get, and too dang easy to track if you DO have one illegally.
.22 would have done the job. An assassin MIGHT use a larger caliber.
A silenced
Also, not running into an iceberg. Is it just an urban legend that they were too cheap to buy a pair of binoculars?
The real question about supporting life is not only breathable air, but also the surrounding belts that insulate a planet from intense radiation. Ozone layer, Van Allen Belts, and the like are just as - if not more important - than a breathable atmosphere.
PLUS planet tilt.
And distance.
And possibly rotation speed.
I'm not saying that life exists anywhere else...just that the odds are against it. Maybe.
Right. Good gravy on a corn dog, how did I not mention THAT....
It may come down to the same problem with spandex and super-heroes. Other than Spider-man, Spandex rarely does well on screen - leather and looser clothing tends to look less dumb.
TF may be the same way...the principle that the original toys were based on was that you could create either a good-looking car/plane or a good looking robot, but not both. The toy makers (Hasbro and its predecessors in Japan) went the car route...there wasn't an extremely good robot/car until the 20th anniversary Optimus Prime...and that truck isn't much on the road anymore.
The REAL challenge is in spelling that sound out. It's well-nigh impossible.
Yeah, not make the playoffs. Again.
Popular Mechanics, of all mags, came out with a dang good debunking as well.
Cue all "Icy Hot" Jokes HERE, where we can track, categorize, and shoot the offenders.
That's okay.
As the saying goes, psychology is biology, biology is chemistry, chemistry is physics, physics is math, and math is hard.