>>>what do you think gives you the right to kill another for theft? >>>
What gives them the right to steal a year's worth of my life (how much it cost to pay for the car)? Absolutely no such right exists. In fact just two weeks ago a man tried that, and I pointed my gun at him. He was smart and ran away, but believe me rather than watch a thief drive away with a year's worth of salary, he'd be shot.
YOU would prefer to let the thieves run around and stealing without every getting caught. You might as well open your house and let the mice come in & eat up all your food.
Except for the corporation part, true U.S. conservatives think as Jefferson thought. Small government, minimal taxation, pro-self-defense, and of course it was the Republicans who ended slavery.
BTW in my state a man shot a thief he found wandering around in his home. The Pennsylvania prosecutor declared that the PA Constitution upholds the right to defend one's life or property. No charges were issued.
That's how it should be, because property is an extension of your life. For example my car cost me a year of my life in order to buy it. Why should I lose a year of my life to some asshat thief? I cannot think of any reason.
I believe in the right to life, and I also believe in the right to end that life whenever you decide (it's your body; do with it whatever you wish). If you want to voluntarily commit "suicide by thug" you have that right. It's a free country.
No, I was defending the Right to own a gun for Self Defense, especially for the elderly.
How the elderly pay for the gun is the part I don't care about. I posted that in clear and easily understandable English. Go back and re-read it a few more times.
Not so far-fetched. Owners of the new Mercedes and Volkswagen diesels have to buy periodic refills of urea which is then used to neutralize soot from the exhaust. Of course they don't call it urea. It's "anti pollution liquid".
Well the person I quoted in my post only had his computer for 3 years, as have many other PowerMac owners, and it already started leaking in just that short timespan, so your attempt to dismiss the problem so casually is an epic fail.
As for my avoidance of constant upgrades:
My Commodore 64 is over twenty years old, one of my laptops is about ten years, my second laptop is five, and my desktop PC is also five. If any of them were liquid-cooled, they'd likely be dead by now due to fluid leakage. Liquid cooling shortens lifespans faster than air cooling. Why do I keep things so long? One reason is because there are those of us who were not born with a silverspoon in our mouths, and therefore we have to economize and make things last rather than upgrade every other year.
The second reason is the same reason why I drive a 67 horsepower car; I don't need a pocket rocket either to get to work, or to surf the net. I don't buy into the whole "conspicuous consumption" idea that many Americans (including yourself) like to embrace. I think it's foolish and a waste and the key reason why our economy is hovering on the brink of a second Depression. You casually dismiss this as "fearmongering" but I call it intelligent budgeting. I'm proud to say that I have no debt; can you say the same?
The police are searching for illegal immigrants hiding in your car, but instead find a copy of Britney's latest song that you innocently downloaded from amazon.com to your Ipod, and thereby you get yourself arrested. Even if you are later freed, it's a massive inconvenience to be drug downtown and thrown into jail. Better to "just say no".
>>>If you have nothing to hide, being searched shouldn't bother you.
The problem is that you might BELIEVE you have nothing to hide, but the police uncover something that you did not realize is illegal to own, and thus you consented to getting yourself arrested. Always, always say no to a search unless the police can provide a warrant.
That's the thing - in a TRULY free society, things like films and books should not be banned. They should be restricted (i.e. "for adults only") but not banned. In the United States for example, children in sexual acts are banned. Photos of adults dressed as children or CGI children are not, due to freedom of expression.
I'm looking forward to seeing Australian parents arrested because they posted naked photos of their children having fun at the local clothes-optional resort. Or a husband arrested because he took photos of his wife at the topless beach and posted them on the family website.
It will make the Aussie government look incredibly stupid and Puritan.
When I walk through downtown Baltimore, who is there to protect me? (looks around). I don't see any police around so I'm basically a victim waiting to be robbed by some guy hiding around the next corner. The only real protection is (1) a mutual agreement to respect one another's property, (2) common sense to avoid dangerous areas or obvious scams, and (3) as a last resort self-defense when attacked. The internet operates on the same principles.
Why should Medicaid buy a gun? No idea. I don't really care, because I think there are more important issues (like the 1500,000,000,000 given to wealthy corporations as bailouts). A few dollars spent on a gun doesn't interest me.
A baby is sentient? Hardly. Most babies can't even see their own parents, because their brains have not yet developed a visual center! Forget about any kind of higher-level thinking... their brains are still too primitive.
Outlawing guns makes about as much sense as outlawing drugs. The criminals will bring guns into the country using the same routes they use to bring drugs from South America into Europe or the U.S./Canada. In other words, a Gun Prohibition will be about as INeffective as the Drug or Alcohol Prohibitions.
Alexander Hamilton, "Concerning the Militia," 29 Federalist
"There is something so far fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery. Where, in the name of common sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? "
A human fetus at age 5 months (i.e. born 4 months premature) can not be legally killed if it is outside the mother. It is considered murder.
Likewise the moment when a human fetus can be transferred into an "incubator" at age 0, then killing a human fetus will be considered murder. Or at the very least, it will create a great schism of public opinion, as happened in the U.S. circa 1850 regarding the status of african-americans.
>>>I know, it is just a fetus, a parisite that can't live without the body
For now. The moment somebody invents an artificial womb capable of sustaining the human fetus separate from the mother, the justification for killing the human fetus goes away.
Instead the human fetus can be "adopted" either by the state or a loving family, just as we adopt abandoned babies or children now. Killing the human fetus will no longer be an acceptable solution.
As long as you judge people by prejudiced notions like "conservative" or "liberal", you will never be able to truly understand them.
I am a conservative (technically a Jeffersonian), but I still believe in providing a "safety net" for those who fall off the highwire of life & need government assistance to survive. Not all but most of my colleagues believe the same.
So stop being prejudiced and judge individuals as individuals, not labels.
I don't find your comment very funny. The elderly are weak and most-likely to be attacked by criminals. Since they can't rely on aged muscles or frail bones like younger men/women, their ONLY recourse is to shoot the asshole dead.
The right to self-defense is as important as the right to not be enslaved, or the right of self-determination.
"There exists a law which comes to us from nature itself... I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right. . . . A man who has used arms in self-defense is not regarded as having carried them with a homicidal aim." - Roman Senator Cicero. ""The right of self-defence never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals." - George Washington.
You hit the nail on the head. Everybody has, at one point or another, experienced liquid leaking from their water heater, or air conditioner, or car radiator. It creates a mess, an expensive repair, and a shorter operational lifespan versus an air-cooled device. ("My g5 liquid cooled computer...is leaking and dripped onto my power supply. I am looking at a little under a thousand dollars for repair...with less than 2 years of actual use.")
I'd much prefer choosing the air-cooled PC with no moving parts (except a fan), even if that means I only run at 3000 megahertz instead of 6000. All I do is surf the net or stream Heroes off nbc.com, and I'm happy to take a slightly slower "engine" inside my computer (just as my Honda Insight only has 67hp). I don't need a lot of power for my daily routine and neither do most people.
The additional verification questions are ridiculously easy:
- click "I forget my password" - capture that email using the Kaminsky's DNS error by pretending to be Customer@xyz.com - click on emails' weblink - answer "What is your mother's maiden name?" and then reset password to whatever. - start withdrawing money from hacked account.
Repeat over-and-over until you have a few million withdrawn and then quietly retire. "The beauty of the Kaminsky attack, as it was now known, was that it left little trace. A good hacker could reroute email, reset passwords, and transfer money out of accounts quickly. Banks were unlikely to announce the intrusions--online theft is bad PR. Better to just cover the victims' losses."
Slashdot Mirror
>>>what do you think gives you the right to kill another for theft?
>>>
What gives them the right to steal a year's worth of my life (how much it cost to pay for the car)? Absolutely no such right exists. In fact just two weeks ago a man tried that, and I pointed my gun at him. He was smart and ran away, but believe me rather than watch a thief drive away with a year's worth of salary, he'd be shot.
YOU would prefer to let the thieves run around and stealing without every getting caught. You might as well open your house and let the mice come in & eat up all your food.
I'd rather serve jailtime than watch someone drive off a year's worth of my life. Why should the assholes be allowed to get away w/o punishment?
P.S.
Bishop Rock also said, "Castle doctrine and all that. But I suspect you would be tried for murder, and I hope you'd get convicted,"
So in other words he doesn't really believe you have a right to defend your home.
Yes several people were implying (or outright stating) that the elderly can't be trusted with guns.
>>>pompous author.
Where's the "doesn't know how to make an argument without ad hominem attacks" tag?
Except for the corporation part, true U.S. conservatives think as Jefferson thought. Small government, minimal taxation, pro-self-defense, and of course it was the Republicans who ended slavery.
BTW in my state a man shot a thief he found wandering around in his home. The Pennsylvania prosecutor declared that the PA Constitution upholds the right to defend one's life or property. No charges were issued.
That's how it should be, because property is an extension of your life. For example my car cost me a year of my life in order to buy it. Why should I lose a year of my life to some asshat thief? I cannot think of any reason.
Nobody says you "have" to carry a gun.
I believe in the right to life, and I also believe in the right to end that life whenever you decide (it's your body; do with it whatever you wish). If you want to voluntarily commit "suicide by thug" you have that right. It's a free country.
No, I was defending the Right to own a gun for Self Defense, especially for the elderly.
How the elderly pay for the gun is the part I don't care about. I posted that in clear and easily understandable English. Go back and re-read it a few more times.
Not so far-fetched. Owners of the new Mercedes and Volkswagen diesels have to buy periodic refills of urea which is then used to neutralize soot from the exhaust. Of course they don't call it urea. It's "anti pollution liquid".
Well the person I quoted in my post only had his computer for 3 years, as have many other PowerMac owners, and it already started leaking in just that short timespan, so your attempt to dismiss the problem so casually is an epic fail.
As for my avoidance of constant upgrades:
My Commodore 64 is over twenty years old, one of my laptops is about ten years, my second laptop is five, and my desktop PC is also five. If any of them were liquid-cooled, they'd likely be dead by now due to fluid leakage. Liquid cooling shortens lifespans faster than air cooling. Why do I keep things so long? One reason is because there are those of us who were not born with a silverspoon in our mouths, and therefore we have to economize and make things last rather than upgrade every other year.
The second reason is the same reason why I drive a 67 horsepower car; I don't need a pocket rocket either to get to work, or to surf the net. I don't buy into the whole "conspicuous consumption" idea that many Americans (including yourself) like to embrace. I think it's foolish and a waste and the key reason why our economy is hovering on the brink of a second Depression. You casually dismiss this as "fearmongering" but I call it intelligent budgeting. I'm proud to say that I have no debt; can you say the same?
EXAMPLE:
The police are searching for illegal immigrants hiding in your car, but instead find a copy of Britney's latest song that you innocently downloaded from amazon.com to your Ipod, and thereby you get yourself arrested. Even if you are later freed, it's a massive inconvenience to be drug downtown and thrown into jail. Better to "just say no".
>>>If you have nothing to hide, being searched shouldn't bother you.
The problem is that you might BELIEVE you have nothing to hide, but the police uncover something that you did not realize is illegal to own, and thus you consented to getting yourself arrested. Always, always say no to a search unless the police can provide a warrant.
That's the thing - in a TRULY free society, things like films and books should not be banned. They should be restricted (i.e. "for adults only") but not banned. In the United States for example, children in sexual acts are banned. Photos of adults dressed as children or CGI children are not, due to freedom of expression.
I'm looking forward to seeing Australian parents arrested because they posted naked photos of their children having fun at the local clothes-optional resort. Or a husband arrested because he took photos of his wife at the topless beach and posted them on the family website.
It will make the Aussie government look incredibly stupid and Puritan.
Forget the Old West, how about NOW?
When I walk through downtown Baltimore, who is there to protect me? (looks around). I don't see any police around so I'm basically a victim waiting to be robbed by some guy hiding around the next corner. The only real protection is (1) a mutual agreement to respect one another's property, (2) common sense to avoid dangerous areas or obvious scams, and (3) as a last resort self-defense when attacked. The internet operates on the same principles.
Government police can not be everywhere.
Why should Medicaid buy a gun? No idea. I don't really care, because I think there are more important issues (like the 1500,000,000,000 given to wealthy corporations as bailouts). A few dollars spent on a gun doesn't interest me.
A baby is sentient? Hardly. Most babies can't even see their own parents, because their brains have not yet developed a visual center! Forget about any kind of higher-level thinking... their brains are still too primitive.
Outlawing guns makes about as much sense as outlawing drugs. The criminals will bring guns into the country using the same routes they use to bring drugs from South America into Europe or the U.S./Canada. In other words, a Gun Prohibition will be about as INeffective as the Drug or Alcohol Prohibitions.
Alexander Hamilton, "Concerning the Militia," 29 Federalist
"There is something so far fetched and so extravagant in the idea of danger to liberty from the militia that one is at a loss whether to treat it with gravity or raillery. Where, in the name of common sense, are our fears to end if we may not trust our sons, our brothers, our neighbors, our fellow citizens? What shadow of danger can there be from men who are daily mingling with the rest of their countrymen and who participate with them in the same feelings, sentiments, habits and interests? "
A human fetus at age 5 months (i.e. born 4 months premature) can not be legally killed if it is outside the mother. It is considered murder.
Likewise the moment when a human fetus can be transferred into an "incubator" at age 0, then killing a human fetus will be considered murder. Or at the very least, it will create a great schism of public opinion, as happened in the U.S. circa 1850 regarding the status of african-americans.
>>>I know, it is just a fetus, a parisite that can't live without the body
For now. The moment somebody invents an artificial womb capable of sustaining the human fetus separate from the mother, the justification for killing the human fetus goes away.
Instead the human fetus can be "adopted" either by the state or a loving family, just as we adopt abandoned babies or children now. Killing the human fetus will no longer be an acceptable solution.
As long as you judge people by prejudiced notions like "conservative" or "liberal", you will never be able to truly understand them.
I am a conservative (technically a Jeffersonian), but I still believe in providing a "safety net" for those who fall off the highwire of life & need government assistance to survive. Not all but most of my colleagues believe the same.
So stop being prejudiced and judge individuals as individuals, not labels.
I don't find your comment very funny. The elderly are weak and most-likely to be attacked by criminals. Since they can't rely on aged muscles or frail bones like younger men/women, their ONLY recourse is to shoot the asshole dead.
The right to self-defense is as important as the right to not be enslaved, or the right of self-determination.
"There exists a law which comes to us from nature itself... I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right. . . . A man who has used arms in self-defense is not regarded as having carried them with a homicidal aim." - Roman Senator Cicero. ""The right of self-defence never ceases. It is among the most sacred, and alike necessary to nations and to individuals." - George Washington.
You hit the nail on the head. Everybody has, at one point or another, experienced liquid leaking from their water heater, or air conditioner, or car radiator. It creates a mess, an expensive repair, and a shorter operational lifespan versus an air-cooled device. ("My g5 liquid cooled computer...is leaking and dripped onto my power supply. I am looking at a little under a thousand dollars for repair...with less than 2 years of actual use.")
I'd much prefer choosing the air-cooled PC with no moving parts (except a fan), even if that means I only run at 3000 megahertz instead of 6000. All I do is surf the net or stream Heroes off nbc.com, and I'm happy to take a slightly slower "engine" inside my computer (just as my Honda Insight only has 67hp). I don't need a lot of power for my daily routine and neither do most people.
The additional verification questions are ridiculously easy:
- click "I forget my password"
- capture that email using the Kaminsky's DNS error by pretending to be Customer@xyz.com
- click on emails' weblink
- answer "What is your mother's maiden name?" and then reset password to whatever.
- start withdrawing money from hacked account.
Repeat over-and-over until you have a few million withdrawn and then quietly retire. "The beauty of the Kaminsky attack, as it was now known, was that it left little trace. A good hacker could reroute email, reset passwords, and transfer money out of accounts quickly. Banks were unlikely to announce the intrusions--online theft is bad PR. Better to just cover the victims' losses."