Military and Commercial pilots as well as tens of thousands of laypeople have reported seeing things that at least warrant further investigation.
Pretty much anything seen in the past 45-50 years could possibly be top secret military projects but there are plenty of things that go much further back but from your comment, I suspect that you already know this.
When I did my internship, I worked for a company involved in heavy industry and despite the language du jour devotion of the business people, the industrial part still relied heavily on Fortran. It's more cost effective to train new people to maintain the Fortran than it is to re-write and debug mammoth Fortran programs that still work just fine.
For thousands of years, people have been reporting contact with various and sundry non-human entities. Today people talk about aliens, in the past people talked about fairies, in the distant past people spoke of Gods, angels and demons who walked among them. I'm not prepared to go the full von Däniken and declare that is precisely what has been happening but I don't discount the possibility either.
If humanity has had encounters with extraterrestrial life forms, you don't think everyday people would know about it yet. Do you?
Remember this "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet." - Agent Kay
Do you honestly think that the only reason I have an issue with people getting their hands on, for example, a Bushmaster XM15-E2S (the weapon used by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School), is because it's "scary looking"?
Yes, that's precisely why you have an issue with it. More than that, you don't know what you're talking about.
I'm referring to weapons that meet certain criteria such as maximum rate of fire
Lanza's rifle was semi-automatic. That's one bullet per squeeze of the trigger. The maximum rate of fire is nothing like the 750-900 rounds per minute of a "military-grade" rifle. You don't know what you're talking about.
And if those sitting members are able to...
I have taken it as my personal responsibility to never let it get that far. That's why we fight for every inch. That's why we push back.
I heard the same argument in 1994 when Congress passed the Assault Weapons Ban, and of course, it never came to pass then, either.
Yes. You're welcome. I joined the NRA that year and worked hard to retire as many of the assholes who voted for the Clinton Gun Ban as possible. We did great work.
No one ever showed up to confiscate all of your guns then, did they?
The only people who DON'T support universal background checks are pretty much paranoid idiots who think that the gub'ment's out to get them and that they need semi-automatic weapons to defend themselves against some imagined tyranny.
No, those of us who oppose backdoor registration are people who understand how our enemies work. Registration leads to confiscation. It has played out several times all over the world, even a few times in this country. We're not going to make it easy to do that on a national scale.
Why do you feel like you need a semi-automatic weapon so badly...
That's the thing about rights. I don't have to justify my desire to exercise them to you or anyone else. To answer your question 'None of your fucking business." I like the first amendment too.
I don't have any semi-automatic weapons; in fact, I don't even own a gun
BIG surprise there...
I own several. The only way my guns pose any threat to you are if you pose a threat to the safety of my family or if you're the poor dumb slob sent to try to take them from me.
Or how about this one from a sitting United States Congressman saying "I sure wish they would" when asked why his party won't come out against the second amendment?
Or what about this editorial from the Detroit Metro Times entitled Ban all guns, now?
The primary difference between them and you is that they're telling the truth about the ultimate goal.
I'll phrase it this way, for the hard of thinking, I adopt an absolutist position in my defense of second amendment rights because my enemies are absolutists about the destruction of those rights.
For example, I don't think that people should carry guns on airplanes. I don't think that people should have guns in courtrooms. That said, I'll oppose any and all effort to codify into law and and all further restrictions upon the types of firearms I may or or from whom I may buy them. They are not the end, they are a means to the end of an absolute prohibition on civilian gun ownership.
I did answer your question. You're just pretending I didn't because you didn't correctly anticipate my answer.
My defense of the second amendment is absolute because it's the only amendment that faces this level of assault.
People seek to cut back the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments' protections. There are people who are seeking to eliminate the second amendment.
I take no delight in his death, it's very sad that he was struck down in such a manner but it doesn't change the fact that he had a thirty year history of being a raging asshole to people.
I never said that it voided anything. I was simply proving that you were wrong when you said "If you are not a member of the National Guard then you aren't in a militia."
I am a member of the Unorganized Militia, which according to the US Code specifically excludes the National Guard.
Why is it when it comes the 2nd Amendment, you think your gun rights are entirely absolute? Please answer that. No other freedom whether it is for speech, press, religion, etc. is absolute. Yet you won't accept any limitations on the 2nd Amendment.
Because our enemies are trying to completely remove the rights protected by the second amendment. When your enemy is an absolutist, you must oppose them absolutely.
If someone were intent on sodomizing you, would you compromise with a handjob or would you demand that you be left alone?
Honestly Obama with his intentionally frightening ways has done more for gun sales than any NRA propaganda.
There are gun stores all across the country with pictures of the current President captioned "Salesman of the week/month/year/century."
If the Democrats can't take the House in November, the push for national anti-gun legislation is over for another 8 years, if they lose any seats in the Senate it's over for 16-20 years.
I personally would not want to be out with anyone who feels the need to carry a gun, because I don't know what might trigger this person to draw the weapon, and who knows who might eventually get shot. We are all human. We all make mistakes.
If you're in the USA, you don't know how often you are out with people who are armed every day.
Who do you think gives the NRA most of their money? It's not the members.
Where is your proof of this assertion?
The NRA has upwards of 5 million members, each paying between 25 and 35 dollars per year. At the minimum the NRA has 125 million per year in cash that comes only from membership dues. You are also apparently unaware that some older members designate the NRA as beneficiaries of their life insurance policies, some members donate extra money, the NRA has fundraising activities of many varieties of which you're obviously unaware and the NRA's income from merchandising (T Shirts, Sweatshirts, Hats, Magazine Subscriptions, etc).
Basically, you're either making things up or simply repeating lies that you heard from someone else with an agenda.
You just lost everyone with any knowledge of the current firearms industry.
You're not talking about "military-grade" anything, you're talking about "scary looking" guns.
We require no less to legally drive an automobile; in fact, there are thousands more regulations on that activity. Yet somehow for more than a century, we've managed to keep the government from confiscating all of our cars, go figure.
That has something to do with the fact that there isn't a sizeable, vocal minority who wishes that to happen.
We have sitting members of congress who in fact do want to remove all firearms from civilian hands, coincidentally these are the same members of congress who push bullshit like "universal background checks", which are backdoor registration and semi-automatic gun bans.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
I will admit - I *AM* a firearm owner in the United States. I *WOULD* consider a smartweapon that safed itself if more than a foot away from me. Why? Simple - statisitics.
You considering one of these things isn't the issue. The issue is (for lack of a better term) trigger laws, like NJ and California that will mandate all new guns have these "features" withing (X timeframe) of them becoming available to consumers.
Antigun lawmakers from antigun districts have little to fear at election time from gun owners but any company who enables their nonsense laws by bringing this technology to the consumer market has much to fear. If your business plan includes actions that will really piss off the people who would be your customers, you likely won't be in business for long.
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard. (b) The classes of the militia are— (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
The National Guard is one class of militia. Many/Most of us are in the Unorganized Militia.
Basically, it is cherry-picking by various ambiguous qualifiers: "stable", "developed", etc. Usually these are just keywords for "..as compared primarily to the UK, Western Europe, and Canada.."
It's a dog-whistle for the obviously racist intent of "majority white". That's what they mean, that's what they're saying, they just lack the guts to be explicit with it.
Slashdot Mirror
For everything he did after Jedi, I want to beat that man about the head and neck with a sweat sock full of nickels.
Seriously, violence doesn't "solve" anything but it would make me feel better.
LK
Discrimination against left handers is more akin go what gay people experience.
LK
Can we please stop with the "gay is the new black" nonsense?
LK
Military and Commercial pilots as well as tens of thousands of laypeople have reported seeing things that at least warrant further investigation.
Pretty much anything seen in the past 45-50 years could possibly be top secret military projects but there are plenty of things that go much further back but from your comment, I suspect that you already know this.
LK
Fortran is still in use in heavy industry.
When I did my internship, I worked for a company involved in heavy industry and despite the language du jour devotion of the business people, the industrial part still relied heavily on Fortran. It's more cost effective to train new people to maintain the Fortran than it is to re-write and debug mammoth Fortran programs that still work just fine.
LK
For thousands of years, people have been reporting contact with various and sundry non-human entities. Today people talk about aliens, in the past people talked about fairies, in the distant past people spoke of Gods, angels and demons who walked among them. I'm not prepared to go the full von Däniken and declare that is precisely what has been happening but I don't discount the possibility either.
If humanity has had encounters with extraterrestrial life forms, you don't think everyday people would know about it yet. Do you?
Remember this "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet." - Agent Kay
LK
DAMN IT. You beat me by 30 minutes.
LK
Do you honestly think that the only reason I have an issue with people getting their hands on, for example, a Bushmaster XM15-E2S (the weapon used by Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook Elementary School), is because it's "scary looking"?
Yes, that's precisely why you have an issue with it. More than that, you don't know what you're talking about.
I'm referring to weapons that meet certain criteria such as maximum rate of fire
Lanza's rifle was semi-automatic. That's one bullet per squeeze of the trigger. The maximum rate of fire is nothing like the 750-900 rounds per minute of a "military-grade" rifle. You don't know what you're talking about.
And if those sitting members are able to...
I have taken it as my personal responsibility to never let it get that far. That's why we fight for every inch. That's why we push back.
I heard the same argument in 1994 when Congress passed the Assault Weapons Ban, and of course, it never came to pass then, either.
Yes. You're welcome. I joined the NRA that year and worked hard to retire as many of the assholes who voted for the Clinton Gun Ban as possible. We did great work.
No one ever showed up to confiscate all of your guns then, did they?
They failed but they tried.
The only people who DON'T support universal background checks are pretty much paranoid idiots who think that the gub'ment's out to get them and that they need semi-automatic weapons to defend themselves against some imagined tyranny.
No, those of us who oppose backdoor registration are people who understand how our enemies work. Registration leads to confiscation. It has played out several times all over the world, even a few times in this country. We're not going to make it easy to do that on a national scale.
Why do you feel like you need a semi-automatic weapon so badly...
That's the thing about rights. I don't have to justify my desire to exercise them to you or anyone else. To answer your question 'None of your fucking business." I like the first amendment too.
I don't have any semi-automatic weapons; in fact, I don't even own a gun
BIG surprise there...
I own several. The only way my guns pose any threat to you are if you pose a threat to the safety of my family or if you're the poor dumb slob sent to try to take them from me.
LK
No they're not. They want limits like every other amendment. It's only your paranoia.
It's not paranoia if they're really trying to do it.
Perhaps your allies haven't gotten the memo but they are trying to eliminate the second amendment, like that quote from a sitting United States Senator.
How about asshole Bruce Perens take on the issue?
Or how about this one from a sitting United States Congressman saying "I sure wish they would" when asked why his party won't come out against the second amendment?
Or what about this editorial from the Detroit Metro Times entitled Ban all guns, now?
The primary difference between them and you is that they're telling the truth about the ultimate goal.
I'll phrase it this way, for the hard of thinking, I adopt an absolutist position in my defense of second amendment rights because my enemies are absolutists about the destruction of those rights.
For example, I don't think that people should carry guns on airplanes. I don't think that people should have guns in courtrooms. That said, I'll oppose any and all effort to codify into law and and all further restrictions upon the types of firearms I may or or from whom I may buy them. They are not the end, they are a means to the end of an absolute prohibition on civilian gun ownership.
LK
I did answer your question. You're just pretending I didn't because you didn't correctly anticipate my answer.
My defense of the second amendment is absolute because it's the only amendment that faces this level of assault.
People seek to cut back the first, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh and eighth amendments' protections. There are people who are seeking to eliminate the second amendment.
LK
Changing the nomenclature again is going to increase skepticism.
LK
"How could anyone have approved that?"
Because Steve Jobs was an ASSHOLE.
I take no delight in his death, it's very sad that he was struck down in such a manner but it doesn't change the fact that he had a thirty year history of being a raging asshole to people.
LK
No, I'm not a lawyer. I am educated and can read.
I never said that it voided anything. I was simply proving that you were wrong when you said "If you are not a member of the National Guard then you aren't in a militia."
I am a member of the Unorganized Militia, which according to the US Code specifically excludes the National Guard.
LK
Why is it when it comes the 2nd Amendment, you think your gun rights are entirely absolute? Please answer that. No other freedom whether it is for speech, press, religion, etc. is absolute. Yet you won't accept any limitations on the 2nd Amendment.
Because our enemies are trying to completely remove the rights protected by the second amendment. When your enemy is an absolutist, you must oppose them absolutely.
If someone were intent on sodomizing you, would you compromise with a handjob or would you demand that you be left alone?
LK
Again this technology does not address any of these nor was it supposed to. It is supposed to prevent accidental shooting and weapons theft.
No. This technology is intended to make guns expensive. Punitively expensive.
LK
Honestly Obama with his intentionally frightening ways has done more for gun sales than any NRA propaganda.
There are gun stores all across the country with pictures of the current President captioned "Salesman of the week/month/year/century."
If the Democrats can't take the House in November, the push for national anti-gun legislation is over for another 8 years, if they lose any seats in the Senate it's over for 16-20 years.
LK
I personally would not want to be out with anyone who feels the need to carry a gun, because I don't know what might trigger this person to draw the weapon, and who knows who might eventually get shot. We are all human. We all make mistakes.
If you're in the USA, you don't know how often you are out with people who are armed every day.
LK
Who do you think gives the NRA most of their money? It's not the members.
Where is your proof of this assertion?
The NRA has upwards of 5 million members, each paying between 25 and 35 dollars per year. At the minimum the NRA has 125 million per year in cash that comes only from membership dues. You are also apparently unaware that some older members designate the NRA as beneficiaries of their life insurance policies, some members donate extra money, the NRA has fundraising activities of many varieties of which you're obviously unaware and the NRA's income from merchandising (T Shirts, Sweatshirts, Hats, Magazine Subscriptions, etc).
Basically, you're either making things up or simply repeating lies that you heard from someone else with an agenda.
LK
bans on military-grade weaponry
You just lost everyone with any knowledge of the current firearms industry.
You're not talking about "military-grade" anything, you're talking about "scary looking" guns.
We require no less to legally drive an automobile; in fact, there are thousands more regulations on that activity. Yet somehow for more than a century, we've managed to keep the government from confiscating all of our cars, go figure.
That has something to do with the fact that there isn't a sizeable, vocal minority who wishes that to happen.
We have sitting members of congress who in fact do want to remove all firearms from civilian hands, coincidentally these are the same members of congress who push bullshit like "universal background checks", which are backdoor registration and semi-automatic gun bans.
LK
So that sorta blows that "we're all part of a militia - so we can all have all the firearms we want" argument away...
No. No, it doesn't.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
I will admit - I *AM* a firearm owner in the United States. I *WOULD* consider a smartweapon that safed itself if more than a foot away from me.
Why? Simple - statisitics.
You considering one of these things isn't the issue. The issue is (for lack of a better term) trigger laws, like NJ and California that will mandate all new guns have these "features" withing (X timeframe) of them becoming available to consumers.
Antigun lawmakers from antigun districts have little to fear at election time from gun owners but any company who enables their nonsense laws by bringing this technology to the consumer market has much to fear. If your business plan includes actions that will really piss off the people who would be your customers, you likely won't be in business for long.
LK
If you are not a member of the National Guard then you aren't in a militia.
Basically, you don't know what in the hell you're talking about.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
The National Guard is one class of militia. Many/Most of us are in the Unorganized Militia.
You try again.
LK
There are plenty of good cops out there
I suppose that's arguable but if the majority of cops were good, how could bad cops continue to exist?
Good cops are the minority.
LK
This might be the first time in the history of the internet that a goatse link was actually informative.
LK
Japanese Americans have an even lower violent crime rate than Japanese at in Japan.
LK
Basically, it is cherry-picking by various ambiguous qualifiers: "stable", "developed", etc. Usually these are just keywords for "..as compared primarily to the UK, Western Europe, and Canada.."
It's a dog-whistle for the obviously racist intent of "majority white". That's what they mean, that's what they're saying, they just lack the guts to be explicit with it.
LK