Designs for pipe bombs have been available for ages on print , from BBS and finaly 'the internet'. Does that mean that I should acctually build and posess one? Yes that's a rethorical question!
It's a stupid question - the manufacture and possession of a pipe bomb is, in itself, a crime.
Knowing shit is not, thankfully, a criminal act. Let's do our best to keep it that way, shall we?
But, by not allowing ANYONE to have guns will make it harder for criminals to do stuff.
No, it won't. History evidences that fact.
How many criminals are weak and puny and would, otherwise, not be able to rob a store, or kill a bunch of students? Many of them are only powerful when they have a gun.
Ban the hammer, I will drive nails with a crowbar. Ban the crowbar, I will use a rock. Point being, you cannot stop a determined carpenter from driving the nail.
The only real solution is to get rid of all of the guns. But that means that the good people can't have guns either.
The worst mass killings in history have all been perpetrated with explosives; explosives comprised of common chemicals, many of which we all keep on hand in our homes as cleaning supplies.
Tell me - would banning guns have stopped Timothy McVeigh?
I'm fascinated by what will happen when 3D printing manages to create its first illegal object.
Probably the same thing that happened when someone used a lathe to create an illegal object for the first time - they get busted for manufacture and possession of an illegal object.
What will happen when they do? Authorities will have to crack down on 3D printing patterns, which will be impossible.
"Authorities" won't 'have to' do shit - what mental gymnastics would cause someone to think that they would? No, seriously, try applying that "logic" to anything else that can be used to manufacture illegal objects, and you'll see how quickly it falls apart.
Perfect example: Flower pots, dirt, and water can be used to grow marijuana (an illegal object); "Authorities will have to crack down on gardening supplies" is obviously not a logical resolution. Same concept applies here.
This upcoming clash between object legality and post-scarcity technology will make the copyright wars look like a kindergarten brawl.
And will end the same way. Prohibition doesn't work. Never has, never will.
If you're a profiteer of the industrial prison complex, like former VP Dick Cheney is, then prohibition most definitely does work, and in a quite profitable manner.
Therein lies the real problem - removal of freedom has become a for-profit venture.
People that make these CAD files are directly responsible for the inevitable massacres that will be perpetuated with them. I hope there is a hell for them to burn in.
...
Not sure if trolling or joking...
Surely nobody's stupid enough to actually believe such nonsense...
See, that's where you're wrong. It's not what the government wants, it's what the people want. We want less guns on the streets. We want an absolute end to assault rifles. We are not afraid of our government. Just because you're paranoid and delusional does not mean the rest of us have to be armed to the teeth.
You don't speak for me, or anyone else outside your own head, so fuck you.
Personally, I've never found it funny, and the justifications people come up with for such immoral behavior (which all, essentially, boil down to, "well, everyone else is doing it!") is downright terrifying.
I already have a phone that does this. As someone who is aware of my surroundings and generally conscientious, I simply turn my phone to "vibrate" or even - God forbid - OFF... It works very well indeed. And I even still receive alerts if a call or text came in. Amazing technology.
Cute, Apple patents something in 2012 that I've had on my Android phone since 2010 (little app called WhereRing). That sort of thing never happens.
Minor bitch, a script that takes input from existing sensors and uses said input to cause a particular action in existing hardware is not what I would refer to as "technology."
What's your obsession with anger management classes? A bit of transference, I presume?
Look, dude, you invited the responses you received when you made the half-assed, idiotic comment about ballots and elections, in a discussion that had nothing to do with the aforementioned topic. If you're going to respond to people with snarky nonsense, you should expect that you will not be treated well, especially with those of us who refuse to suffer fools gladly. In short, don't stand in the kitchen if you can't take the heat.
For the record, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to say something stupid and nonsensical, nor did anyone force you to continue to defend your stupid and nonsensical comment via continually escalating stupidity and childishness. You chose to engage in this conversation of your own volition, and are just as guilty as you claim I am for fostering immaturity, so don't even try to pull that victimized, reversal-of-position bullshit on me.
FYI, you're no more innocent for your part in this admittedly moronic debate than I am; it takes two to tango, after all.
"I'll fix that bug later" is legit when you're already having trouble meeting a deadline, better to meet it with a buggy product and fix it during QC than not deliver.
Sounds like a dumb idea, until you realize that Chuck E. Cheese and similar businesses have, for decades, been using a similar tactic to avoid running afoul of gambling laws: You're not playing for gifts or money, you're playing for worthless tokens!
I doubt the Feds would allow Japanese style Pachinko gambling, where one business sells/buys the steel balls and another has the gaming machines.
Maybe you could do something online, with a non-US company selling/buying Entertainment Bucks and online casinos accepting/paying out with the same.
The Feds would probably call it all money laundering and make your life hell.
I suppose the thing to do, in that case, would be to start a bank.
I still don't understand why you consider jurisdiction significant.
Because it is.
Consider this case of the exploit kit maker: Presuming he lives in a city/county/state that does not have a law that explicitly makes his sale of the exploit kit a criminal act, then he cannot be charged with any crime, as there definitely is not a federal law against making available tools which can be used for crime (assuming, of course, this isn't the tools only stated purpose; with the exploit kit, it is a reasonable assumption that the tools can be used to prevent crime as well, and thus they are not crime-exclusive tools).
Conversely, if he lives somewhere that has a local/state ordinance making the sale of potential crime tools a crime in itself, then he most definitely could be arrested, and subject to prosecution.
The point is, OP stated their opinion in such a way as to indicate their belief that, regardless of locality, selling the kit would be a punishable offense in the US. I merely intended to point out how and why that is not the case, albeit doing an apparently piss-poor job of clarifying my intended meaning.
In both of those cases though, the player has control over when or how strong the pull is, therefor it's a skill based game. With the giant wheel, the harder/faster you pull the lever determines the strength of the spin. With the spinning light, when you press the button determines where the light lands. There is no "randomness" to either game.
The spinning light game I can see that being the case (didn't actually play it myself), but I did play the slot game and I can assure you, the speed/force with which the lever is pulled has absolutely no bearing on the end result; We played it for about an hour (had good payouts, little bugger made out like a bandit), taking turns between myself (fairly little guy), my nephew (standard issue 6 year old, non-obese), and my brother (6'5", 280 lb hulking beast of a man). The payouts came up randomly regardless of who was playing. Then again, maybe it was malfunctioning, I couldn't say.
With a slot machine, there is no skill in winning. It's based solely on a random number determined once the lever is pulled (or button is pressed).
Leading me to wonder, could someone legally operate a casino type business in a region with anti-gambling laws, if they used the "game of skill" loophole? I'm going to guess no, since the only way for the house to profit in that case is to rig the games, and from what I can tell only Carny folk are allowed to get away with that sort of behavior.
Whenever you introduce new technology on an aircraft design, you open the door for problems you haven't seen before.
This is very true for many things.
The problem with applying your premise to this situation is that the aspects these craft are having problems with (brakes, fuel lines, windshields, electrical wiring) are old, well-established technologies.
I also suggest you read the summary as the issue isn't guns, the swiss have guns, it's about the fact that you don't care about how you keep them (i.e. not safely nor securely) which leads to accidents.
5: Choking (~2,500 deaths/yr)
4: Fires (~2,700 deaths/yr)
3: Slip-N-Falls (~25,000 deaths/yr)
2: Accidental Poisoning (~40,000 deaths/yr)
And the number one cause of accidental deaths in the US: Automobile accidents, comprising over 50,000 deaths per year.
No, Chuck E. Cheese and similar businesses (like carnival midways) run games that are (at least theoretically) games of skill rather than games of chance - because it's the latter than run afoul of the gambling laws. What you're playing for is irrelevant.
Apparently, there are exceptions - last time I was in a Chuck E. Cheese type establishment (less than a year ago), I noticed a "game" that was, essentially, an overgrown one-armed bandit. You would put a token in, pull the comically large arm, and watch as the big, single slot wheel turned and turned, before eventually stopping on a random value of tickets. Another nearby "game" had a circle of lights, that would, after inserting tokens and pushing a button, illuminate in sequence before stopping on a random value.
Slashdot Mirror
So they shouldn't ban it because it's possible to 3D print one?
So...why ban drugs that are easily grown or made at home.... So why enforce copyright since it's easy for me to download what I want at home....
You know, if it wasn't plainly obvious you're trying to be a smart-ass, I'd say you're starting to get it.
Designs for pipe bombs have been available for ages on print , from BBS and finaly 'the internet'. Does that mean that I should acctually build and posess one? Yes that's a rethorical question!
It's a stupid question - the manufacture and possession of a pipe bomb is, in itself, a crime.
Knowing shit is not, thankfully, a criminal act. Let's do our best to keep it that way, shall we?
But, by not allowing ANYONE to have guns will make it harder for criminals to do stuff.
No, it won't. History evidences that fact.
How many criminals are weak and puny and would, otherwise, not be able to rob a store, or kill a bunch of students? Many of them are only powerful when they have a gun.
Ban the hammer, I will drive nails with a crowbar. Ban the crowbar, I will use a rock. Point being, you cannot stop a determined carpenter from driving the nail.
The only real solution is to get rid of all of the guns. But that means that the good people can't have guns either.
The worst mass killings in history have all been perpetrated with explosives; explosives comprised of common chemicals, many of which we all keep on hand in our homes as cleaning supplies.
Tell me - would banning guns have stopped Timothy McVeigh?
Good job, now they will ban 3d printers for public use and large capacity clips.
Just like how they banned lathes and drill presses the first time someone milled their own receiver, right?
Idiot.
I'm fascinated by what will happen when 3D printing manages to create its first illegal object.
Probably the same thing that happened when someone used a lathe to create an illegal object for the first time - they get busted for manufacture and possession of an illegal object.
What will happen when they do? Authorities will have to crack down on 3D printing patterns, which will be impossible.
"Authorities" won't 'have to' do shit - what mental gymnastics would cause someone to think that they would? No, seriously, try applying that "logic" to anything else that can be used to manufacture illegal objects, and you'll see how quickly it falls apart.
Perfect example: Flower pots, dirt, and water can be used to grow marijuana (an illegal object); "Authorities will have to crack down on gardening supplies" is obviously not a logical resolution. Same concept applies here.
This upcoming clash between object legality and post-scarcity technology will make the copyright wars look like a kindergarten brawl.
And will end the same way. Prohibition doesn't work. Never has, never will.
If you're a profiteer of the industrial prison complex, like former VP Dick Cheney is, then prohibition most definitely does work, and in a quite profitable manner.
Therein lies the real problem - removal of freedom has become a for-profit venture.
People that make these CAD files are directly responsible for the inevitable massacres that will be perpetuated with them. I hope there is a hell for them to burn in.
...
Not sure if trolling or joking...
Surely nobody's stupid enough to actually believe such nonsense...
See, that's where you're wrong. It's not what the government wants, it's what the people want. We want less guns on the streets. We want an absolute end to assault rifles. We are not afraid of our government. Just because you're paranoid and delusional does not mean the rest of us have to be armed to the teeth.
You don't speak for me, or anyone else outside your own head, so fuck you.
Personally, I've never found it funny, and the justifications people come up with for such immoral behavior (which all, essentially, boil down to, "well, everyone else is doing it!") is downright terrifying.
Everyone will have some of THESE Just when you thought they had already invented every phone accessory possible, the come up with special pants.
Kneejerk reaction: That's got to be the dumbest, first-world-problem product I've ever seen!
Secondary reaction: Hey, those would be damn handy for secret games of Angry Birds on those "Death By Meeting" days...
I already have a phone that does this. As someone who is aware of my surroundings and generally conscientious, I simply turn my phone to "vibrate" or even - God forbid - OFF... It works very well indeed. And I even still receive alerts if a call or text came in. Amazing technology.
Yes Apple already patented the technology, silencing the phone based on GPS location. Similar to geofencing that came out in iOS 5
Cute, Apple patents something in 2012 that I've had on my Android phone since 2010 (little app called WhereRing). That sort of thing never happens.
Minor bitch, a script that takes input from existing sensors and uses said input to cause a particular action in existing hardware is not what I would refer to as "technology."
"Bloody obvious" would be a good alternate term.
....but I guess you have to play the game.
Only if you intend to perpetuate it.
"I must do evil, because everyone else does" is not a valid excuse, and only serves to eternalize douche-baggery.
They're probably assuming that everyone wears sheer dresses... (and pants, and shirts,...).
Seems reasonable...
Hey, if that's the NWO dress code, I take back everything bad I ever said about our mysterious overlords!
On second thought... how the heck am I supposed to hide a boner in sheers?
Only for idiots like you who can't tell that's Pat, the sexually/racially ambigous thing. Wasps don't have fro's
Ha, +1 Nostalgic Reference!
Cue Pat's trademark moan.
What's your obsession with anger management classes? A bit of transference, I presume?
Look, dude, you invited the responses you received when you made the half-assed, idiotic comment about ballots and elections, in a discussion that had nothing to do with the aforementioned topic. If you're going to respond to people with snarky nonsense, you should expect that you will not be treated well, especially with those of us who refuse to suffer fools gladly. In short, don't stand in the kitchen if you can't take the heat.
For the record, nobody put a gun to your head and forced you to say something stupid and nonsensical, nor did anyone force you to continue to defend your stupid and nonsensical comment via continually escalating stupidity and childishness. You chose to engage in this conversation of your own volition, and are just as guilty as you claim I am for fostering immaturity, so don't even try to pull that victimized, reversal-of-position bullshit on me.
FYI, you're no more innocent for your part in this admittedly moronic debate than I am; it takes two to tango, after all.
"I'll fix that bug later" is legit when you're already having trouble meeting a deadline, better to meet it with a buggy product and fix it during QC than not deliver.
...
Ballmer, is that you?
Ducks to avoid flying office chairs
Sounds like a dumb idea, until you realize that Chuck E. Cheese and similar businesses have, for decades, been using a similar tactic to avoid running afoul of gambling laws: You're not playing for gifts or money, you're playing for worthless tokens!
I doubt the Feds would allow Japanese style Pachinko gambling, where one business sells/buys the steel balls and another has the gaming machines.
Maybe you could do something online, with a non-US company selling/buying Entertainment Bucks and online casinos accepting/paying out with the same.
The Feds would probably call it all money laundering and make your life hell.
I suppose the thing to do, in that case, would be to start a bank.
No harm no foul.
I still don't understand why you consider jurisdiction significant.
Because it is.
Consider this case of the exploit kit maker: Presuming he lives in a city/county/state that does not have a law that explicitly makes his sale of the exploit kit a criminal act, then he cannot be charged with any crime, as there definitely is not a federal law against making available tools which can be used for crime (assuming, of course, this isn't the tools only stated purpose; with the exploit kit, it is a reasonable assumption that the tools can be used to prevent crime as well, and thus they are not crime-exclusive tools).
Conversely, if he lives somewhere that has a local/state ordinance making the sale of potential crime tools a crime in itself, then he most definitely could be arrested, and subject to prosecution.
The point is, OP stated their opinion in such a way as to indicate their belief that, regardless of locality, selling the kit would be a punishable offense in the US. I merely intended to point out how and why that is not the case, albeit doing an apparently piss-poor job of clarifying my intended meaning.
In both of those cases though, the player has control over when or how strong the pull is, therefor it's a skill based game. With the giant wheel, the harder/faster you pull the lever determines the strength of the spin. With the spinning light, when you press the button determines where the light lands. There is no "randomness" to either game.
The spinning light game I can see that being the case (didn't actually play it myself), but I did play the slot game and I can assure you, the speed/force with which the lever is pulled has absolutely no bearing on the end result; We played it for about an hour (had good payouts, little bugger made out like a bandit), taking turns between myself (fairly little guy), my nephew (standard issue 6 year old, non-obese), and my brother (6'5", 280 lb hulking beast of a man). The payouts came up randomly regardless of who was playing. Then again, maybe it was malfunctioning, I couldn't say.
With a slot machine, there is no skill in winning. It's based solely on a random number determined once the lever is pulled (or button is pressed).
Leading me to wonder, could someone legally operate a casino type business in a region with anti-gambling laws, if they used the "game of skill" loophole? I'm going to guess no, since the only way for the house to profit in that case is to rig the games, and from what I can tell only Carny folk are allowed to get away with that sort of behavior.
Whenever you introduce new technology on an aircraft design, you open the door for problems you haven't seen before.
This is very true for many things.
The problem with applying your premise to this situation is that the aspects these craft are having problems with (brakes, fuel lines, windshields, electrical wiring) are old, well-established technologies.
I suggest you read a book on statistics.
I also suggest you read the summary as the issue isn't guns, the swiss have guns, it's about the fact that you don't care about how you keep them (i.e. not safely nor securely) which leads to accidents.
There are approximately 600 accidental gun deaths per annum in the USA. Doesn't even make the Top 5 causes of accidental death, which happen to be:
5: Choking (~2,500 deaths/yr)
4: Fires (~2,700 deaths/yr)
3: Slip-N-Falls (~25,000 deaths/yr)
2: Accidental Poisoning (~40,000 deaths/yr)
And the number one cause of accidental deaths in the US: Automobile accidents, comprising over 50,000 deaths per year.
Side note: In 2011, of the ~50,000 deaths caused by automobile accidents, over 3,000 of them were caused by people texting while driving.
That is 5 times the rate of accidental firearms deaths.
Food for thought.
But the numbers of death by firearm is five times as high in the U.S. than in any other of the 17 countries.
What about the suicide rate?
Considering that the main cause of gun deaths in the US is suicide, a higher suicide rate would account for the increased number of firearms deaths.
obviouslt your agenda forbade you to read:
As did yours. Mind explaining how "teen pregnancy" has fuck-all to do with health?
Mental health is still health.
Ever met a pregnant teenager? I have; They tend to be a bit... emotionally unstable.
Keep in mind that 18 and 19 are still part of your teenage years.
Don't be a pedant.
No, Chuck E. Cheese and similar businesses (like carnival midways) run games that are (at least theoretically) games of skill rather than games of chance - because it's the latter than run afoul of the gambling laws. What you're playing for is irrelevant.
Apparently, there are exceptions - last time I was in a Chuck E. Cheese type establishment (less than a year ago), I noticed a "game" that was, essentially, an overgrown one-armed bandit. You would put a token in, pull the comically large arm, and watch as the big, single slot wheel turned and turned, before eventually stopping on a random value of tickets. Another nearby "game" had a circle of lights, that would, after inserting tokens and pushing a button, illuminate in sequence before stopping on a random value.
No skill required.