ou know, I really think Vinge was spot on when he mentioned the need to actually teach people to use search engines... [snip]...add "-aclu" to the query, though that filters out plenty legitimate results (which mention that story in passing in the context of a different one).
Or you could, you know, just post a link to the thing that supports or explains your assertion. Why exactly do you think I need to spend all my time trying to look up your supporting links?
...where the answer is readily found within a minute of searching using any of the major search engines.
Well, I Googled "DHS 100 mile zone", and it returned a bunch of results that were just other sites commenting on the original ACLU story that you listed. So, no, your other links are not 'readily found'.
You can start with reviewing a list of checkpoints in the south:
the farthest that I can find on that list is about 30 miles from the border. Still nowhere close to the claimed 100 miles.
you really need to get a book like "Internet for Dummies" or something! This says "mile marker 78 of eastbound I-8, 75 miles east of Yuma, AZ (55 miles north of the international border)".
And what exactly did you type into Google to get that result?
It's not the article that claims 100 mile zone, it's the DHS
Where did they claim this? I saw no reference to it in the article, and you didn't bother to point out where they claimed it either.
Others have happened further away - there is one case specifically documented at 40 miles.
Then why didn't they highlight that case? And any reason you didn't feel like posting any details about it? Or a link?
JFGI
?????
In any case, most of San Diego is still not "the border" under any sane definiton.
The article never said it was in San Diego. It only gave a vague reference to somewhere around San Diego. They have the same habit as you of being vague and outraged at the same time.
One could claim a reasonable area around so as to pursue violators, but "reasonable" in this case is 1-2 miles at most
So, if I can outrun the border patrol for 2 miles, I'm home free? Sweet. Remind me not to put you in charge of security for anything.
I read the article that claimed a "100 mile border zone"... and then they highlighted the case of a man that was stopped somewhere east of San Diego. For those of you not familiar with the geography of the United States, San Diego is a tad bit closer than 100 miles from the border. Add the fact that they say "east of" and "many miles after crossing the border", and it looks like they don't want to actually say where this incident took place, because then they would look really silly for claiming 100 miles.
I can take pictures of the inside of buildings all day long that I have been allowed into. Once I have those pictures, I can use them. They can PREVENT me from taking photos while I'm in there in the first place, by asking me to leave any cameras at the front desk, sign a form stating that I won't take pictures, etc. But trying to stop me from using pictures that I already have is crap.
since you acknowledged that most guns are not used for crime, are you claiming that you want to use your gun to shoot a very likely unarmed person
1. The poster never said that most guns are not used for crime.
2. Even assuming the poster did say that, how in the hell do you jump to the conclusion that an intruder is 'very likely unarmed'?
3. If someone attempts to break into your house, what is your course of action? Let it happen, and hope that the intruder leaves you and your family alone?
Talk about you being the judge, jury and executioner who decides life and death in one split second, in the middle of the night.
The intruder can avoid this situation by not trying to break into someone's house. The intruder has no one to blame but himself for the outcome.
If Cisco can't sell network/detection/whatever technology to China, then we shouldn't be allowed to trade with China at all. If they are that bad, then what the hell are we doing even associating with them? Every item we sell to them could potentially be used for bad things, and every dollar they make off of us could be used to fund bad things.
I would also like to point out that Cisco sold this technology to catch members of an illegal group within China (AKA, criminals). Just because we don't like the definition of criminal in China doesn't mean we should beat Cisco up over it.
Wow, I make some little offhand joke post, and you act like I plagiarized his latest novel or something. And you took the time to post about it, and I'm pathetic?
Watching the local news, and one of their local offices had a sign in their front window asking for UPS Saturday pickup. The reporters got a good chuckle out of that.
Indicating there are still other companies willing to process these transactions. The spammers will just switch to them if the 'big 3' refuse to do business with them.
increased safety net spending from retiring baby-boomers
You think they are going to unretire anytime soon?
The wars will end
When? Not only has Obama NOT ended either of those wars, he has decided to start new ones (Libya).
taxes can be increased
By whom? All Obama had to do to increase taxes to pre-Bush era levels was... nothing. Yet he decided to extend the cuts longer, and even threw in a SS tax cut (for some unknown reason). No politician wants to be the one to raise taxes right now.
and the recession won't last forever
But how much debt will we have racked up by then? Remember, ever year that we run a deficit, we have to spend MORE next year just to pay off that debt!
Oh, cripes, you studied classical economics, didn't you?
No. What exactly do you mean by 'classical economics'? And why is that bad?
If you get paid $1000 April 30 in this example you'd need $10,000 by May 31 to buy the same amount of products.
...but the salaries in the US are stagnant. No company in the US is going to give 1,000% raises a month. Ever.
I saw my salary go up by eight times one month, and was still behind inflation.
So you lived in a country that had no idea how to handle their economy. Hyperinflation only happens if the government cranks out tons and tons of money to pump things up by several orders of magnitude. We aren't quite that stupid here.
If they don't sell that bottle it will sit on the shelf until salaries catch up, because they don't have any choice.
They will go out of business waiting for salaries to catch up. When gas prices shot up here a few years ago, people started using less gas. Guess what? Prices started to drop.
You need to stop listening to the hallowed oracles of the Chicago School and see how things work in the real world.
I have no idea what 'the hallowed oracles of the Chicago School' are (they only have one school in Chicago?) And I understand perfectly well how things work in the real world, thank you very much.
Think for a moment about buying a $1 CocaCola on May 1, and by May 31 that same bottle costs $10. Think about going to 10 different grocery stores and none of them have meat, milk or eggs because no one is selling to them since they don't know what the replacement price is going to be next week.
THAT'S what you think is going to happen if China doesn't buy up our debt? We have TOO much food in this country, not a shortage of it. And why would you buy CocaCola for $10? It won't be that price because no one will buy it.
Did you forget that they're a communist country?
And they have become an economic force by moving towards capitalism. Going back to communism won't make them better. USSR anyone?
There is a reason it is 'pent-up'; most of their people are poor farmers.
If they don't sell it to us they'll sell it to citizens of other countries for less, and to themselves for even less.
...thereby making less money. How does that help them?
The US hasn't seen a major economic disruption since the 1930s
Ummmm.... read the news in the last few years? And we were also hit hard during the late 70's and early 90's. This isn't our first time going through this.
His speed was clocked by radar. He presented no evidence that refutes the radar evidence.
So, you skipped over the part of the article where he presented two pictures FROM THE SAME COMPANY, showing that the cars weren't going as fast as the radar said? Is photographic, timestamped evidence not enough for you?
Photos were to prove presence, not speed.
They were meant to show presence, but the timestamp allowed speed to be easily calculated. If it is submitted as evidence for the prosecution (presence), it can be used by the defense (speed).
Slashdot Mirror
Those sales are 75% off the crap that they couldn't sell at 0-50% off.
ou know, I really think Vinge was spot on when he mentioned the need to actually teach people to use search engines... [snip]...add "-aclu" to the query, though that filters out plenty legitimate results (which mention that story in passing in the context of a different one).
Or you could, you know, just post a link to the thing that supports or explains your assertion. Why exactly do you think I need to spend all my time trying to look up your supporting links?
...where the answer is readily found within a minute of searching using any of the major search engines.
Well, I Googled "DHS 100 mile zone", and it returned a bunch of results that were just other sites commenting on the original ACLU story that you listed. So, no, your other links are not 'readily found'.
You can start with reviewing a list of checkpoints in the south:
the farthest that I can find on that list is about 30 miles from the border. Still nowhere close to the claimed 100 miles.
you really need to get a book like "Internet for Dummies" or something! This says "mile marker 78 of eastbound I-8, 75 miles east of Yuma, AZ (55 miles north of the international border)".
And what exactly did you type into Google to get that result?
Also, the '55 miles north of the international border' sounds sooooo scary... except that the 55 miles between that highway and the international border is an airforce range and national wildlife refuge. That's about as close as they can get to an actual road. Hey, you could, you know Google that location to see for yourself! http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=mohawk,+az&aq=&sll=32.580378,-113.671417&sspn=0.863256,1.234589&gl=us&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Mohawk,+Arizona&ll=32.622027,-113.711243&spn=0.862854,1.234589&z=10
It's not the article that claims 100 mile zone, it's the DHS
Where did they claim this? I saw no reference to it in the article, and you didn't bother to point out where they claimed it either.
Others have happened further away - there is one case specifically documented at 40 miles.
Then why didn't they highlight that case? And any reason you didn't feel like posting any details about it? Or a link?
JFGI
?????
In any case, most of San Diego is still not "the border" under any sane definiton.
The article never said it was in San Diego. It only gave a vague reference to somewhere around San Diego. They have the same habit as you of being vague and outraged at the same time.
One could claim a reasonable area around so as to pursue violators, but "reasonable" in this case is 1-2 miles at most
So, if I can outrun the border patrol for 2 miles, I'm home free? Sweet. Remind me not to put you in charge of security for anything.
I read the article that claimed a "100 mile border zone"... and then they highlighted the case of a man that was stopped somewhere east of San Diego. For those of you not familiar with the geography of the United States, San Diego is a tad bit closer than 100 miles from the border. Add the fact that they say "east of" and "many miles after crossing the border", and it looks like they don't want to actually say where this incident took place, because then they would look really silly for claiming 100 miles.
I can take pictures of the inside of buildings all day long that I have been allowed into. Once I have those pictures, I can use them. They can PREVENT me from taking photos while I'm in there in the first place, by asking me to leave any cameras at the front desk, sign a form stating that I won't take pictures, etc. But trying to stop me from using pictures that I already have is crap.
It certainly measures MY length!
since you acknowledged that most guns are not used for crime, are you claiming that you want to use your gun to shoot a very likely unarmed person
1. The poster never said that most guns are not used for crime.
2. Even assuming the poster did say that, how in the hell do you jump to the conclusion that an intruder is 'very likely unarmed'?
3. If someone attempts to break into your house, what is your course of action? Let it happen, and hope that the intruder leaves you and your family alone?
Talk about you being the judge, jury and executioner who decides life and death in one split second, in the middle of the night.
The intruder can avoid this situation by not trying to break into someone's house. The intruder has no one to blame but himself for the outcome.
If Cisco can't sell network/detection/whatever technology to China, then we shouldn't be allowed to trade with China at all. If they are that bad, then what the hell are we doing even associating with them? Every item we sell to them could potentially be used for bad things, and every dollar they make off of us could be used to fund bad things.
I would also like to point out that Cisco sold this technology to catch members of an illegal group within China (AKA, criminals). Just because we don't like the definition of criminal in China doesn't mean we should beat Cisco up over it.
Cisco was an active participant in creating the Great Firewall.
The Great Firewall was never mentioned in TFA. From TFA:
Cisco "competed aggressively" for the contracts to design the Golden Shield system...
Wow, I make some little offhand joke post, and you act like I plagiarized his latest novel or something. And you took the time to post about it, and I'm pathetic?
REALLY last post! See, it can get better...
But he's not racist, since Italian is not a race. So he CAN define the semantics of his demonization. See, it all works out!
Watching the local news, and one of their local offices had a sign in their front window asking for UPS Saturday pickup. The reporters got a good chuckle out of that.
Indicating there are still other companies willing to process these transactions. The spammers will just switch to them if the 'big 3' refuse to do business with them.
Damn, TWO troll votes for making a little joke? Sheesh.
increased safety net spending from retiring baby-boomers
You think they are going to unretire anytime soon?
The wars will end
When? Not only has Obama NOT ended either of those wars, he has decided to start new ones (Libya).
taxes can be increased
By whom? All Obama had to do to increase taxes to pre-Bush era levels was... nothing. Yet he decided to extend the cuts longer, and even threw in a SS tax cut (for some unknown reason). No politician wants to be the one to raise taxes right now.
and the recession won't last forever
But how much debt will we have racked up by then? Remember, ever year that we run a deficit, we have to spend MORE next year just to pay off that debt!
Whoosh!
We need to get more Democrats into office this next election to get rid of the Republican majority in the Senate so these evil bills won't get passed!
ETA in Spain killed more than 2000
Nope. Around 800-900... over the course of several decades. We do call it 9/11 because all of those deaths happened on that day.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ETA_attacks
...By comparison 9/11 claimed about 1600.
Your are only off by about half. it was nearly 3,000.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
Oh, cripes, you studied classical economics, didn't you?
No. What exactly do you mean by 'classical economics'? And why is that bad?
If you get paid $1000 April 30 in this example you'd need $10,000 by May 31 to buy the same amount of products.
...but the salaries in the US are stagnant. No company in the US is going to give 1,000% raises a month. Ever.
I saw my salary go up by eight times one month, and was still behind inflation.
So you lived in a country that had no idea how to handle their economy. Hyperinflation only happens if the government cranks out tons and tons of money to pump things up by several orders of magnitude. We aren't quite that stupid here.
If they don't sell that bottle it will sit on the shelf until salaries catch up, because they don't have any choice.
They will go out of business waiting for salaries to catch up. When gas prices shot up here a few years ago, people started using less gas. Guess what? Prices started to drop.
You need to stop listening to the hallowed oracles of the Chicago School and see how things work in the real world.
I have no idea what 'the hallowed oracles of the Chicago School' are (they only have one school in Chicago?) And I understand perfectly well how things work in the real world, thank you very much.
Think for a moment about buying a $1 CocaCola on May 1, and by May 31 that same bottle costs $10. Think about going to 10 different grocery stores and none of them have meat, milk or eggs because no one is selling to them since they don't know what the replacement price is going to be next week.
THAT'S what you think is going to happen if China doesn't buy up our debt? We have TOO much food in this country, not a shortage of it. And why would you buy CocaCola for $10? It won't be that price because no one will buy it.
Did you forget that they're a communist country?
And they have become an economic force by moving towards capitalism. Going back to communism won't make them better. USSR anyone?
...with an enormous pent-up demand
There is a reason it is 'pent-up'; most of their people are poor farmers.
If they don't sell it to us they'll sell it to citizens of other countries for less, and to themselves for even less.
...thereby making less money. How does that help them?
The US hasn't seen a major economic disruption since the 1930s
Ummmm.... read the news in the last few years? And we were also hit hard during the late 70's and early 90's. This isn't our first time going through this.
...and their country will implode when we no longer have the money to buy the crap they manufacture. Lose-lose situation.
His speed was clocked by radar. He presented no evidence that refutes the radar evidence.
So, you skipped over the part of the article where he presented two pictures FROM THE SAME COMPANY, showing that the cars weren't going as fast as the radar said? Is photographic, timestamped evidence not enough for you?
Photos were to prove presence, not speed.
They were meant to show presence, but the timestamp allowed speed to be easily calculated. If it is submitted as evidence for the prosecution (presence), it can be used by the defense (speed).