If you were planing on using them against the United States Military when Crooked Hilary gets elected it'll be too late by then. You and your AR-15 don't stand a chance against a modern mechanized army with supply lines and tactical training.
Which perfectly explains why the US Military wasn't stuck dealing with insurgents with small arms and improvised bombs in Iraq for over a decade after defeating the Iraqi military....
This really is similar to the argument about autonomous cars. Will a smart gun result in fewer unintentional fatalities outweighed by the different fatalities it may cause?
No, I'm sorry. Whenever gun owners have brought up cars during the gun control debate, we've been told it's not a valid comparison since GUNS ARE DESIGNED TO KILL PEOPLE.
You have NO IDEA how effective the finger scanner will be. How about we take a look at that first, see what kind of tech they actually put into it, and then make choices based on that? In much the same way you don't buy a car with known faulty brakes, just don't buy a gun with a scanner that is known to be unreliable.
The problem is the people writing laws generally don't want you to have that choice. "Don't want to buy a gun with a known-faulty scanner? Then don't buy a gun."
The current population of human beings on this planet is unsustainable.
If that were true, then wouldn't the population be decreasing instead of increasing? It's like saying you are in a plane and you slow down to below stall speed and say the lift generated by the wings cannot sustain the weight of the plane yet the plane continues to fly. Until populations decrease, all the evidence shows that the population is sustainable.
It's been a while since my college biology course, but if I recall correctly, it's not uncommon for a population experiencing exponential growth to shoot right past the carrying capacity for a while. Eventually, the population crashes until numbers fall under the carrying capacity, at which point several outcomes are possible.
The simple fact that population size is not decreasing is NOT evidence that the population size is sustainable. Rather, the fact that population size isn't slowing down might very well be evidence that it ISN'T sustainable...
Not quite true, though at that point you'd have to pay a forensic locksmith to take apart the lock. The act of key bumping basically slams the key against the bottom pins to allow for kinetic energy to be transferred from the key to the top pins. Because they are immobile and absorb the kinetic energy, this causes considerable damage to the bottom pins in the form of large dents and scratches. Similarly, picking the lock tends to leave distinctive scratches on the interior pins...
Realistically, for most consumer applications of locks, if someone wanted to get in, the lock isn't keeping them out.
This is very true, but even then the lock accomplishes something else: it creates evidence of a break-in. You show your home insurance adjuster a kicked in door, they cut a check. You swear up and down that you locked the door and someone must have hacked it, have a fun few months/years in court...
Being able to hack the lock from a car parked on the street also has advantages: it cuts down on the amount of time and noise you have to make to break in. After all, there's a reason thieves are getting into electronic gizmos to unlock car doors...
Butter is rich in fat-soluble vitamins
Butter contains short and medium chain fats, which are the healthy fats
Butter is an excellent source of the 4-carbon fatty acid butyrate
Dutch researchers found that raw butter fat protects against calcification of the joints — degenerative arthritis — as well as hardening of the arteries, cataracts and calcification of the pineal gland
The list goes on. There's plenty healthy about butter, so long as it's in moderation...
If it came to it, your little rifle means jack shit to a fighter plane and a tank. It might have mattered in the 1700s but you are SO outgunned and outclassed and outtrained that it is only a fancy way of suicide.
Which is why the recent conflict in Iraq was a quick little affair. The Iraq war totally didn't get extended another decade after defeating the Iraqi military because of some insurgent types with small arms and improvised bombs....
You'll see things here that look odd, even antiquated to modern eyes, like phones with cords, awkward manual valves, computers that, well, barely deserve the name. It was all designed to operate against an enemy who could infiltrate and disrupt even the most basic computer systems. Galactica is a reminder of a time when we were so frightened by our enemies that we literally looked backward for protection...
You'll see things here that look odd or even antiquated to modern eyes. Phones with cords, awkward manual valves, computers that, well, barely deserve the name...
It was all designed to operate against an enemy who could infiltrate and disrupt even the most basic computer systems.
Isn't it funny how the only thing Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on is that you can't, under any circumstances, vote for a 3rd party or all is lost?
According to the 2006 Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are 'vegetarian', while another 9% also consume eggs (ovo-vegetarian).
Hardly "dominant" if 2/3 of the country eats meat...
Historians have shown that the people of ancient India, beginning with Brahmins, ate many kinds of meat, including that of cattle. Example: take a look at the Manu Smriti, Chapter V
The Fourth Amendment doesn't protect a right to privacy. The Fourth Amendment protects the right to be free from unreasonable searches. Keeping private data private doesn't suddenly make a search not a search...
Let's examine an earlier school shooting: Columbine
Were you aware that Columbine was supposed to be a bombing, not a shooting? The BATFE estimates that had their bombs worked, they would have had casualties in the triple digits. But when their bombs failed, the assholes "settled" for just running around and shooting...
What if they couldn't do that? What if they went home and build better bombs instead?
Remember: the deadliest school attack in US history was not a shooting...
Gun violence, as well as violent crime in general, has dropped significantly in the last 2 decades or so
America is FOURTH in death by gun, after Thailand, Nigeria and Colombia; that's the company we keep.
Actually, America isn't even in the top ten.
We have more murders by gun than any developed (and many undeveloped) nations.
That's cherry-picking, unless you can explain why it makes sense to compare the US vs Sweden, but not the US vs Russia. Also, Turkey (considered a developed country depending on definition) has a higher murder rate than the US. And why would "murders by gun" matter more than just simply "murders"?
The NRA *actively* lobbies to defeat laws that will keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill persons, and on and on. It's a national disgrace.
The ACLU *actively* lobbies to defeat laws that will keep criminals and rapists on the streets. But instead of calling it a national disgrace, we refer to it as the inherent risks of essential liberty.
What about the rights of the 100's of thousands of people that have been murdered by gun in America - what about them?
What exactly about them? Safety and/or protection from criminals and madmen isn't exactly a right, and the supreme court has made it clear repeatedly that citizens have to expectation of police protection...
Slashdot Mirror
Except they didn't overlook it. If you read the Heller decision, they spend quite a bit of time looking into that "well regulated militia" phrase.
If you were planing on using them against the United States Military when Crooked Hilary gets elected it'll be too late by then. You and your AR-15 don't stand a chance against a modern mechanized army with supply lines and tactical training.
Which perfectly explains why the US Military wasn't stuck dealing with insurgents with small arms and improvised bombs in Iraq for over a decade after defeating the Iraqi military....
Oh wait...
This really is similar to the argument about autonomous cars. Will a smart gun result in fewer unintentional fatalities outweighed by the different fatalities it may cause?
No, I'm sorry. Whenever gun owners have brought up cars during the gun control debate, we've been told it's not a valid comparison since GUNS ARE DESIGNED TO KILL PEOPLE.
You have NO IDEA how effective the finger scanner will be. How about we take a look at that first, see what kind of tech they actually put into it, and then make choices based on that? In much the same way you don't buy a car with known faulty brakes, just don't buy a gun with a scanner that is known to be unreliable.
The problem is the people writing laws generally don't want you to have that choice. "Don't want to buy a gun with a known-faulty scanner? Then don't buy a gun."
I'm amazed there's no you-can't-sue-you-have-to-go-to-brinding-arbitration clause.
Per the article: "All eight of the plaintiffs in the suit opted out of the arbitration clause in their contract."
The current population of human beings on this planet is unsustainable.
If that were true, then wouldn't the population be decreasing instead of increasing? It's like saying you are in a plane and you slow down to below stall speed and say the lift generated by the wings cannot sustain the weight of the plane yet the plane continues to fly. Until populations decrease, all the evidence shows that the population is sustainable.
It's been a while since my college biology course, but if I recall correctly, it's not uncommon for a population experiencing exponential growth to shoot right past the carrying capacity for a while. Eventually, the population crashes until numbers fall under the carrying capacity, at which point several outcomes are possible.
The simple fact that population size is not decreasing is NOT evidence that the population size is sustainable. Rather, the fact that population size isn't slowing down might very well be evidence that it ISN'T sustainable...
"scientists calculated that it was traveling at up to 40,000 kilometers an hour (24,856 mph) when it hit Sentinel-1A."
40,000 kilometers an hour relative to what exactly? The satellite? The earth? The sun?
Not quite true, though at that point you'd have to pay a forensic locksmith to take apart the lock. The act of key bumping basically slams the key against the bottom pins to allow for kinetic energy to be transferred from the key to the top pins. Because they are immobile and absorb the kinetic energy, this causes considerable damage to the bottom pins in the form of large dents and scratches. Similarly, picking the lock tends to leave distinctive scratches on the interior pins...
Realistically, for most consumer applications of locks, if someone wanted to get in, the lock isn't keeping them out.
This is very true, but even then the lock accomplishes something else: it creates evidence of a break-in. You show your home insurance adjuster a kicked in door, they cut a check. You swear up and down that you locked the door and someone must have hacked it, have a fun few months/years in court...
Being able to hack the lock from a car parked on the street also has advantages: it cuts down on the amount of time and noise you have to make to break in. After all, there's a reason thieves are getting into electronic gizmos to unlock car doors...
I have had Bic pens that have lasted longer than most iPhones...
there is nothing healthy about butter
FALSE
Butter is rich in fat-soluble vitamins
Butter contains short and medium chain fats, which are the healthy fats
Butter is an excellent source of the 4-carbon fatty acid butyrate
Dutch researchers found that raw butter fat protects against calcification of the joints — degenerative arthritis — as well as hardening of the arteries, cataracts and calcification of the pineal gland
The list goes on. There's plenty healthy about butter, so long as it's in moderation...
If it came to it, your little rifle means jack shit to a fighter plane and a tank. It might have mattered in the 1700s but you are SO outgunned and outclassed and outtrained that it is only a fancy way of suicide.
Which is why the recent conflict in Iraq was a quick little affair. The Iraq war totally didn't get extended another decade after defeating the Iraqi military because of some insurgent types with small arms and improvised bombs....
Hmmmm, sounds familiar...
You'll see things here that look odd, even antiquated to modern eyes, like phones with cords, awkward manual valves, computers that, well, barely deserve the name. It was all designed to operate against an enemy who could infiltrate and disrupt even the most basic computer systems. Galactica is a reminder of a time when we were so frightened by our enemies that we literally looked backward for protection...
You'll see things here that look odd or even antiquated to modern eyes. Phones with cords, awkward manual valves, computers that, well, barely deserve the name...
It was all designed to operate against an enemy who could infiltrate and disrupt even the most basic computer systems.
Right, because Clinton never voted to go to war with Iraq...
or pushed to start bombing Libya...
Or advocated an Iraq-style "surge" in Afghanistan...
Wait, why does it seem significantly lower to you again?
Isn't it funny how the only thing Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on is that you can't, under any circumstances, vote for a 3rd party or all is lost?
According to the 2006 Hindu-CNN-IBN State of the Nation Survey, 31% of Indians are 'vegetarian', while another 9% also consume eggs (ovo-vegetarian).
Hardly "dominant" if 2/3 of the country eats meat...
Historians have shown that the people of ancient India, beginning with Brahmins, ate many kinds of meat, including that of cattle. Example: take a look at the Manu Smriti, Chapter V
The Fourth Amendment doesn't protect a right to privacy. The Fourth Amendment protects the right to be free from unreasonable searches. Keeping private data private doesn't suddenly make a search not a search...
Let's examine an earlier school shooting: Columbine
Were you aware that Columbine was supposed to be a bombing, not a shooting? The BATFE estimates that had their bombs worked, they would have had casualties in the triple digits. But when their bombs failed, the assholes "settled" for just running around and shooting...
What if they couldn't do that? What if they went home and build better bombs instead?
Remember: the deadliest school attack in US history was not a shooting...
Just like the Sony PS3 "Other OS" debacle!
oh wait...
Or do you think someone can commit mass murder on this scale with knives and baseball bats?
Between knife attacks in China and intentionally set fires in Australia? Yes, yes I do...
Remember: the worst school attack in US history *wasn't* a shooting...
So the one NRA member you can think of that's committed a terrorist act... didn't use guns?
...huh
And he managed to kill more people than any active shooter incident?
What about the federal law declaring me as part of the militia?
This has become a regular event in America.
Gun violence, as well as violent crime in general, has dropped significantly in the last 2 decades or so
America is FOURTH in death by gun, after Thailand, Nigeria and Colombia; that's the company we keep.
Actually, America isn't even in the top ten.
We have more murders by gun than any developed (and many undeveloped) nations.
That's cherry-picking, unless you can explain why it makes sense to compare the US vs Sweden, but not the US vs Russia. Also, Turkey (considered a developed country depending on definition) has a higher murder rate than the US. And why would "murders by gun" matter more than just simply "murders"?
The NRA *actively* lobbies to defeat laws that will keep guns out of the hands of mentally ill persons, and on and on. It's a national disgrace.
The ACLU *actively* lobbies to defeat laws that will keep criminals and rapists on the streets. But instead of calling it a national disgrace, we refer to it as the inherent risks of essential liberty.
What about the rights of the 100's of thousands of people that have been murdered by gun in America - what about them?
What exactly about them? Safety and/or protection from criminals and madmen isn't exactly a right, and the supreme court has made it clear repeatedly that citizens have to expectation of police protection...
What they don't know doesn't affect them.
The government must *love* you...