First of all, it depends on how it looks from the drivers perspective. I have been to some airports where a wrong turn leads you between two building an dthen into the runway. There isn't a way to realize this when you are in the car. I haven't been to this particulate airport but it is obvious the runways wasn't secure against outside traffic.
Secondly, you are too quick with the stupid comment. I know know geniuses(literally) that you wouldn't want behind the wheel.
Finally, you have no idea how the gene pool works.
It's based on the tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of a fraction of the universe we have explored, It assume interstellar travel is possible It assume other civilization didn't expand and then die. It assumes it takes less resources to get to the next star is less then available resources It assume other species would want to expand.
Until we ahve : A) Sent people to another planet around a different star B) those people are able to be self sustains and thrive C) Invent materials that will last millions of years and still be recognizable as created by an intelligent species
while no data shows any link between video game usage and increased violence* you argument is fallacious. Stating something invented now and harms people doesn't mean its the only cause thats ever been.
*slight decrease in violence, but nothing well outside error bars.
Because the supreme court ruled there is no right o privacy regarding prescriptions. From the brief:
, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no constitutional right of privacy to prescription information. Whalen, 429 U.S. at 603-05. The Ninth Circuit recently summarized the holding in Whalen when it stated: “The holding in Whalen was that the New York law did not violate any constitutional rights of the patient whose prescriptions were revealed to the government.” Seaton, 610 F.3d at 537
"I am not looking forward to government bureaucrats deciding what is and is not needed for my medical conditions. which doesn't have a damn thing to do with Affordable Health Care Act
"That is for me and the doctor to decided, not the government." And that's the way it will stay.
" Obama has proven himself to be even worse than Bush" sigh, no he hasn't been.
Now I'm going to say the same thing I have said about every president during the last 30 years: They aren't Omnipotent. They do not know what everyone under them is doing, and they aren't really hands on running each agency beneath them. No that doesn't absolve them from their actions, it's jut a reminder that people do things of their own will and not everyone in the federal government emails the president asking them for permission for everything they do.
Now, abut this article. The DEA's primary arguments seem to be: 1) Prescription aren't private, based on a ruling by the supreme court:
"mportantly, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no constitutional right of privacy to prescription information. Whalen, 429 U.S. at 603-05. The Ninth Circuit recently summarized the holding in Whalen when it stated: “The holding in Whalen was that the New York law did not violate any constitutional rights of the patient whose prescriptions were revealed to the government.” Seaton, 610 F.3d at 537. Case 3:12-cv-02023-HA Document 43 Filed 08/20/13 Page 27 of 31 Page ID#: 741"
What that specific case ment bt prescription information, I haven't a clue. COuld have simply been the amount of prescritons, could ahv ebeen everytihg, could have been under a specific set of circumstances not mentioned. However, based on the information I do have, it seems the DEA doesn't need a warrant.
The other primary point, to me, is: 2) Probably cause. Which has held up fine.
I suspect people like you love this becasue if Obama steped in and told the DEA not to do this, you would be pounding out some feeble opinion that Obama is bad for not letting the DEA enforce laws, or if he says nothing you can say look at what he is doing.
And before you attempt to pound some sort of response: I do not agree with the DEA, I think this is wrong. I think it's ludicrous the Marijuana is rated at the Class it is.
Slashdot Mirror
How so?
I heard that in Cave Johnson's voice.
Why not?
I will assume you trust the people who make you shoes, and shirt, and desk, and microwave and.. everything else in you house.
Because it's more then that.
It looks like their goal is for the consumer to stream anything they want.
Right now, getting thing streamed to the living room is a mish mash of technology.
One box that could stream everything I want regardless of container? that would be a game changer.
It keeps you from reselling what you paid for.
everyone know this was his goal from the beginning. You don't become CEO, and make a statement like that without the intention of selling.
Good luck driving onto the airplane.
Seriously, not the same thing.
There are a couple of problems with your post.
First of all, it depends on how it looks from the drivers perspective. I have been to some airports where a wrong turn leads you between two building an dthen into the runway. There isn't a way to realize this when you are in the car.
I haven't been to this particulate airport but it is obvious the runways wasn't secure against outside traffic.
Secondly, you are too quick with the stupid comment. I know know geniuses(literally) that you wouldn't want behind the wheel.
Finally, you have no idea how the gene pool works.
I see someone often gets modded down. I suspect that person also thinks their posts are genius.
"it has unusually intelligent commenters overall;"
bwahahaha.
It's a decent mod system, stop making up excuse at why it works better then pretty much every other comment place on the web.
That doesn't mean it's perfect or can't be improved.
Dear Consumers:
Stop being a bunch of cheap asses and buy them when we put them out.
Thanks.
Is it safe to assume you don't own a microwave, TV, and car becasue there not easy to change the boot?
Yes, but wouldn't it be nice to have a site where we can talk about the interesting events and science.
There are media outlets galore that have in depth look at the dead people.
Far less with any decent discussion about the geological events in detail.
The Fermi Paradox isn't.
It's based on the tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of a fraction of the universe we have explored,
It assume interstellar travel is possible
It assume other civilization didn't expand and then die.
It assumes it takes less resources to get to the next star is less then available resources
It assume other species would want to expand.
Until we ahve :
A) Sent people to another planet around a different star
B) those people are able to be self sustains and thrive
C) Invent materials that will last millions of years and still be recognizable as created by an intelligent species
You can't even have the paradox.
Yes, becasue geological events are interesting.
Death of people that far removed from ones personal experience, while tragic, doesn't exactly make people pause with their day.
If it did, we would all go crazy.
while no data shows any link between video game usage and increased violence* you argument is fallacious.
Stating something invented now and harms people doesn't mean its the only cause thats ever been.
*slight decrease in violence, but nothing well outside error bars.
So your two bills would be to jail people who didn't violate the law?
If they are capturing people who aren't supposed to be driving, why is your scenario bad?
So you're a big fan when they stand up for your rights, but not any others?
jerk.
Because the supreme court ruled there is no right o privacy regarding prescriptions.
From the brief:
, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no constitutional right of
privacy to prescription information. Whalen, 429 U.S. at 603-05. The Ninth Circuit
recently summarized the holding in Whalen when it stated: “The holding in Whalen was
that the New York law did not violate any constitutional rights of the patient whose
prescriptions were revealed to the government.” Seaton, 610 F.3d at 537
"I am not looking forward to government bureaucrats deciding what is and is not needed for my medical conditions.
which doesn't have a damn thing to do with Affordable Health Care Act
"That is for me and the doctor to decided, not the government."
And that's the way it will stay.
It's not unconstitutional.
Why do the most clueless people regarding the constitution scream 'unconstitutional' with everything they don't like?
oh, right Dunning-Krugar.
the fact that you list the DEA and ATF as redundant tells me you are pretty damn clueless about what they are tasked with doing.
" Obama has proven himself to be even worse than Bush"
sigh, no he hasn't been.
Now I'm going to say the same thing I have said about every president during the last 30 years: They aren't Omnipotent. They do not know what everyone under them is doing, and they aren't really hands on running each agency beneath them.
No that doesn't absolve them from their actions, it's jut a reminder that people do things of their own will and not everyone in the federal government emails the president asking them for permission for everything they do.
Now, abut this article.
The DEA's primary arguments seem to be:
1) Prescription aren't private, based on a ruling by the supreme court:
"mportantly, the Supreme Court has ruled that there is no constitutional right of
privacy to prescription information. Whalen, 429 U.S. at 603-05. The Ninth Circuit
recently summarized the holding in Whalen when it stated: “The holding in Whalen was
that the New York law did not violate any constitutional rights of the patient whose
prescriptions were revealed to the government.” Seaton, 610 F.3d at 537.
Case 3:12-cv-02023-HA Document 43 Filed 08/20/13 Page 27 of 31 Page ID#: 741"
What that specific case ment bt prescription information, I haven't a clue. COuld have simply been the amount of prescritons, could ahv ebeen everytihg, could have been under a specific set of circumstances not mentioned.
However, based on the information I do have, it seems the DEA doesn't need a warrant.
The other primary point, to me, is:
2) Probably cause. Which has held up fine.
I suspect people like you love this becasue if Obama steped in and told the DEA not to do this, you would be pounding out some feeble opinion that Obama is bad for not letting the DEA enforce laws, or if he says nothing you can say look at what he is doing.
And before you attempt to pound some sort of response:
I do not agree with the DEA, I think this is wrong.
I think it's ludicrous the Marijuana is rated at the Class it is.
another story that will give an excuse to the ignorant and childless to give child rearing advise!
Obama approves of science.
Science bring up questions people don't like.
Therefore repeal Obamacare.