Except for the a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners than compared to good people, therefore if you want to correlate bad persons its easier to check the gun registry.
That might be the most retarded thing I've read on/.
While a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners, you won't find them on the CCW lists or filling out 4473s at the local gun shop. They illegally buy illegal guns illegally imported from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
Incorrect most illegal guns are bought at local gun shops, and most aren't illegally imported from overseas, all this is according the the ATF. Restructing the licensure and criteria for lawful sales of firearms, will do the most to restrict the unregulated supplies of guns. Some would argue that even the founding fathers had experience with gun violence, and wanted firearm possession to be solely for the use of a well regulated militia, and not even for two consenting adults who agree to duel each other.
The projection bias, bravado, paranoia, necessity that sometimes leads to gun ownership, is a pretty strong indication that the person is bad or crazy.
And how many case studies did you perform before pulling this conclusion out of your ass?
The fact that so many bad guys have guns, and they're so easy for bad guys to buy, despite all of the laws against it (I'm confounded as to why these criminals keep violating the gun laws), would prompt a rational person to look for a form of protection. Therefore I conclude that the number of guns a person owns is directly proportional to his sanity.
If your willing to use a gun, then your more prone to violence, and more likely to act violently. Gun ownership rates are also positively correlated with crime rates. While you may think that your a sane person, you may end up being the next George Zimmerman instead.
I cannot count the number of times I have seen John Wayne or 'gangasta' wannabes flash their weapon, as if they are somehow the just and righteous parties (mass killers are included), but end up just being either dumb, ignorant, or mentally ill.
I can't count the number of times a unicorn has bought me lunch, and probably for the same reason.
I'd wager I know a few more legal gun owners than you do, and we as a group do not flash our guns. We are normal middle-class people who know that the cops can't be everywhere and that there are evil, crazy, or otherwise dangerous people in the world.
During a traffic accident where a guy thought the other guy was at fault, on the rapid transit train during a feud over a woman, at a natural hotspring as a notion of bravado, at the same exact hot spring by drunk russians carrying rifles and gallons of carlow rossi, an old jewish man who got confronted because he was slandering 'towelheads' and pulled his gun after 'feeling threatened', a bozo neighbor who blocked the road and belligerently tried to lecture me (incorrectly) about right of way with my bike in a single lane double yellow lane, and donned his holstered gun and threatened me after I had his car towed for parking in my old neighbor ladies disabled spot.
all of these people wanted to "protect themeselves" from 'evil', 'crazy', 'dangerous' people, by either advertising that they shouldn't be fucked with, or directly threatening other people.
Without guns there are no bad people with guns, and no need for good people with guns, or bad people who think they are good people with guns.
So when a 250lb. man without a gun rapes a 110lb. woman without a gun, that's okay to you? That's sounds like a situation where a good guy with a gun would be really damn useful. Incidentally, a woman who carries a firearm is 310 times
strawman: the primary purpose of a vehicle is not killing people, even if it is as dangerous as a gun. Its not as if mandatory breathalyzers in cars would be such a bad idea either. I can't wait until google perfects the driverless cars, considering the number of shitty drivers out there who aren't drunk.
What prevents the rights of a few robber barons, from creating monopolies on their "private property", and dispossessing the wealth of the people.... thats right, the "tyranny of the masses", go vomit your pontificate psudo-intellectual musings elsewhere.
The government has the right to do, whatever its elected officials decide to do, and is not deemed unconstitutional. I believe its called democracy, or in otherwords 'the social contract', which makes you a lawless teabagger.
Except for the a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners than compared to good people, therefore if you want to correlate bad persons its easier to check the gun registry. The projection bias, bravado, paranoia, necessity that sometimes leads to gun ownership, is a pretty strong indication that the person is bad or crazy. I cannot count the number of times I have seen John Wayne or 'gangasta' wannabes flash their weapon, as if they are somehow the just and righteous parties (mass killers are included), but end up just being either dumb, ignorant, or mentally ill. Without guns there are no bad people with guns, and no need for good people with guns, or bad people who think they are good people with guns.
Unless you have a tabulated database of the envelope / voter status (accepted / error), that voters are able to refer to before the election ends, because the early voting period is 2 weeks long.
Anymore coercion than having to wait in line for hours on a day that you have to normally work? That, and an audit would be able to detect the amount of coercion.
I live in oregon, and not only can you vote by paper, but if your disabled you can vote online! It makes it very easy to vote, you dont even need postage (considered a "poll tax".
I actually propose online crypto voting in addition to the traditional sorts of voting, of course utilizing an audited record open to everyone based on uid, and follow ups on random samples of those voters.
Home schooling, charter schools, private schools - all these things operate well and better than public schools, all without unions.
Apples to oranges;
Home Schooling works if you can afford it, and your intelligent enough to do it.
Charter Schools: not all charter schools are great, in fact many of them are plain terrible, and the average cost / performance ratio is about the same.
Private Schools: Again, works if you can afford it, but they are more expensive.
The company controls the collective capital and labor of the business, and a few companies can control the collective capital and labor of an entire market, how would you think that individuals will be able to bargain against such asymmetrical power structures?
Somehow, I think you misunderstood why collective bargaining began, and need to read up on the history late 19th century early 20th century.
Slashdot Mirror
Except for the a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners than compared to good people, therefore if you want to correlate bad persons its easier to check the gun registry.
That might be the most retarded thing I've read on /.
While a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners, you won't find them on the CCW lists or filling out 4473s at the local gun shop. They illegally buy illegal guns illegally imported from Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
Incorrect most illegal guns are bought at local gun shops, and most aren't illegally imported from overseas, all this is according the the ATF. Restructing the licensure and criteria for lawful sales of firearms, will do the most to restrict the unregulated supplies of guns. Some would argue that even the founding fathers had experience with gun violence, and wanted firearm possession to be solely for the use of a well regulated militia, and not even for two consenting adults who agree to duel each other.
The projection bias, bravado, paranoia, necessity that sometimes leads to gun ownership, is a pretty strong indication that the person is bad or crazy.
And how many case studies did you perform before pulling this conclusion out of your ass?
The fact that so many bad guys have guns, and they're so easy for bad guys to buy, despite all of the laws against it (I'm confounded as to why these criminals keep violating the gun laws), would prompt a rational person to look for a form of protection. Therefore I conclude that the number of guns a person owns is directly proportional to his sanity.
If your willing to use a gun, then your more prone to violence, and more likely to act violently. Gun ownership rates are also positively correlated with crime rates. While you may think that your a sane person, you may end up being the next George Zimmerman instead.
I cannot count the number of times I have seen John Wayne or 'gangasta' wannabes flash their weapon, as if they are somehow the just and righteous parties (mass killers are included), but end up just being either dumb, ignorant, or mentally ill.
I can't count the number of times a unicorn has bought me lunch, and probably for the same reason.
I'd wager I know a few more legal gun owners than you do, and we as a group do not flash our guns. We are normal middle-class people who know that the cops can't be everywhere and that there are evil, crazy, or otherwise dangerous people in the world.
During a traffic accident where a guy thought the other guy was at fault, on the rapid transit train during a feud over a woman, at a natural hotspring as a notion of bravado, at the same exact hot spring by drunk russians carrying rifles and gallons of carlow rossi, an old jewish man who got confronted because he was slandering 'towelheads' and pulled his gun after 'feeling threatened', a bozo neighbor who blocked the road and belligerently tried to lecture me (incorrectly) about right of way with my bike in a single lane double yellow lane, and donned his holstered gun and threatened me after I had his car towed for parking in my old neighbor ladies disabled spot.
all of these people wanted to "protect themeselves" from 'evil', 'crazy', 'dangerous' people, by either advertising that they shouldn't be fucked with, or directly threatening other people.
Without guns there are no bad people with guns, and no need for good people with guns, or bad people who think they are good people with guns.
So when a 250lb. man without a gun rapes a 110lb. woman without a gun, that's okay to you? That's sounds like a situation where a good guy with a gun would be really damn useful. Incidentally, a woman who carries a firearm is 310 times
strawman: the primary purpose of a vehicle is not killing people, even if it is as dangerous as a gun. Its not as if mandatory breathalyzers in cars would be such a bad idea either. I can't wait until google perfects the driverless cars, considering the number of shitty drivers out there who aren't drunk.
why dont you try wikipedia you dipshit
What prevents the rights of a few robber barons, from creating monopolies on their "private property", and dispossessing the wealth of the people.... thats right, the "tyranny of the masses", go vomit your pontificate psudo-intellectual musings elsewhere.
The government has the right to do, whatever its elected officials decide to do, and is not deemed unconstitutional. I believe its called democracy, or in otherwords 'the social contract', which makes you a lawless teabagger.
Except for the a higher percentage of bad people are gun owners than compared to good people, therefore if you want to correlate bad persons its easier to check the gun registry. The projection bias, bravado, paranoia, necessity that sometimes leads to gun ownership, is a pretty strong indication that the person is bad or crazy. I cannot count the number of times I have seen John Wayne or 'gangasta' wannabes flash their weapon, as if they are somehow the just and righteous parties (mass killers are included), but end up just being either dumb, ignorant, or mentally ill. Without guns there are no bad people with guns, and no need for good people with guns, or bad people who think they are good people with guns.
We have met the enemy and he is us.
Whether or not they found porn really depends on what your definition of unicorns is http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=unicorn
http://youtu.be/-XSq0PvVxMs?t=1m12s
That I can tell women that I have the AIDS vaccine at the bar, and can give it to them through intra-muscular administration.
you dont have to count the vote, but to scan the envelope when received.
How is requiring people to be present in person at a certain place or time also not a form of coercion?
mod parent up
Unless you have a tabulated database of the envelope / voter status (accepted / error), that voters are able to refer to before the election ends, because the early voting period is 2 weeks long.
Anymore coercion than having to wait in line for hours on a day that you have to normally work? That, and an audit would be able to detect the amount of coercion.
I live in oregon, and not only can you vote by paper, but if your disabled you can vote online! It makes it very easy to vote, you dont even need postage (considered a "poll tax".
Apparently texas wants to put them in jail!
I actually propose online crypto voting in addition to the traditional sorts of voting, of course utilizing an audited record open to everyone based on uid, and follow ups on random samples of those voters.
Noting inherent to the concept of collective bargaining makes performance based pay impossible;
Furthermore the ageism in the tech sector has been a problem for a long time.
Home schooling, charter schools, private schools - all these things operate well and better than public schools, all without unions.
Apples to oranges;
Home Schooling works if you can afford it, and your intelligent enough to do it.
Charter Schools: not all charter schools are great, in fact many of them are plain terrible, and the average cost / performance ratio is about the same.
Private Schools: Again, works if you can afford it, but they are more expensive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimax#Maximin_in_philosophy
The company controls the collective capital and labor of the business, and a few companies can control the collective capital and labor of an entire market, how would you think that individuals will be able to bargain against such asymmetrical power structures?
Somehow, I think you misunderstood why collective bargaining began, and need to read up on the history late 19th century early 20th century.
typically 30 years with 80-90% of the original efficiency, less if you live in a hurricane / tornado prone region.
Considering that Romney adamantly follows a religion which considers caffeine to be intolerable.
Mod parent up (though romney wouldn't have done any different)
http://vimeo.com/38724174