Every new law? The correct statement is "every law." I would also add that some of those "unintended" consequences weren't actually as unintended as one might think.
and intermodal completely skips over the original intent aspect i'm trying ot point out because he is too afraid of it in other areas. My point is that the "law" is fairly often in direct conflict with the "Law" (Constitution) and we put up with it because of bullshit arguments like intermodal's.
Seriously. Could we please stop cherry-picking which rights the Honorable King Bloomberg is allowed to violate? He goes after the 2nd Amendment and/. cheers. He goes after our soda and/. is mixed. When will people realize that Bloomberg is at the top of the 1%ers and is not out to help the "common man." That perspective should inform the sensible reader about everyone of his policies.
I'm fairly certain that they "can" do it. It is actually very simple to open a letter; non-technical people have been doing it for centuries.
Are they allowed to do so by the constitution of the US? No, but a proper reading of that document would also suggest that there is absolutely no difference between email, FedEx, UPS and USPS nor is there a difference between a desk drawer in your home, a safe in your home, a safe deposit box at a bank, a safe in a rented storage unit or Google's server.
Cyberax must live in one of those nutjob anti-gun areas. I've never lived in a state with a lock 'em up requirement.
Either way, he is still talking out of his ass.
if you can afford x, you can afford 2x+Y is pretty obviously false for a huge range of x and y, especially since for some reasonable values of x (in our context) y > 5x.
Assuming that there won't be a significant portion of the military siding with the civilians is probably a bad mistake. The US military requires its officers and enlistees to swear to uphold the Constitution of the US and to obey all lawful orders. They are actually taught that they may be given unlawful ones and reminded about the Nurmberg trials.
Are there any countries that allow unrestricted ownership of weapons? I happen to live in the US and have never heard of a single legal jurisdiction within the US that allows unrestricted ownership of weapons. A quick search will show the honest seeker that fact.
I would think most honest geeks would love to see how far 3D printing can go in the realm of the engineering involved. How many gun-haters here realize the strength requirements being worked on and what kind of advances solving them entails for other areas requiring high-strength materials?
Rifles and handguns are useless for hunting or self-defense? WTF!
Those two purposes cover the design goal of the overwhelming majority of rifles and handguns.
Even if you were talking only about 3D printed ones, you are still way off base. Many modern hunting rifles are being built with as much polymer as possible to reduce weight and to better handle the elements. Have you ever actually looked into hunting to know that much of it happens in wet conditions? Do you realize the harmful effects wet conditions can have on the metal parts of a gun? Why would hunters not be looking for improvements in that area and why would that not be a legitimate desire?
Saying that the legitimate desire of a hunter becomes illegitimate because someone else may repurpose it for illegitimate purposes is like saying that all human communication is illegitimate because some people like to use communication to plan "evil" deeds.
Slashdot Mirror
Or not take away their guns thereby keeping the train engineer safe.
Every new law? The correct statement is "every law." I would also add that some of those "unintended" consequences weren't actually as unintended as one might think.
Really. Still beating that dead horse. There have been plenty of articles exposing that European countries are just as involved as the US.
and intermodal completely skips over the original intent aspect i'm trying ot point out because he is too afraid of it in other areas. My point is that the "law" is fairly often in direct conflict with the "Law" (Constitution) and we put up with it because of bullshit arguments like intermodal's.
Or maybe you can. As you claim, you weren't there so you can't disprove it either; at least the portions that aren't meant to be allegory and such.
Very popular among the supposed "learned" on here as well. It was even alluded to higher up in the comments.
The problem with 1984 becoming reality is that many people on the left and the right read that as a guidebook rather than a warning of dystopia.
Seriously. Could we please stop cherry-picking which rights the Honorable King Bloomberg is allowed to violate? He goes after the 2nd Amendment and /. cheers. He goes after our soda and /. is mixed. When will people realize that Bloomberg is at the top of the 1%ers and is not out to help the "common man." That perspective should inform the sensible reader about everyone of his policies.
I'm fairly certain that they "can" do it. It is actually very simple to open a letter; non-technical people have been doing it for centuries.
Are they allowed to do so by the constitution of the US? No, but a proper reading of that document would also suggest that there is absolutely no difference between email, FedEx, UPS and USPS nor is there a difference between a desk drawer in your home, a safe in your home, a safe deposit box at a bank, a safe in a rented storage unit or Google's server.
And new to public/private key scenarios as well. Might I suggest spending a few minutes to read about something before posting about it.
Desires yes, needs no. Do you have any documented cases of death or great harm to befalling a man because of a lack of sex?
She readily admits to having no desire to acknowledge the 2nd so why should ignoring a few others concern her.
but some people are very slow at typing
Are you actually claiming that the biopsy and cancer treatment was done against her will? I have not read that anywhere else.
Why? Was that share a part of the original agreement? Was there any stipulation made that prevented money from being made?
Yes, she did have a choice. She actually asked them to remove the cells from her body and "dispose" of them anyway they saw fit.
Everywhere I have ever lived, it is illegal to hunt "dears". Doing so gets you charged with domestic violence, murder or both.
Cyberax must live in one of those nutjob anti-gun areas. I've never lived in a state with a lock 'em up requirement.
Either way, he is still talking out of his ass.
if you can afford x, you can afford 2x+Y is pretty obviously false for a huge range of x and y, especially since for some reasonable values of x (in our context) y > 5x.
Kind of. Guns must be capable of withstanding much greater pressures than ICEs. ICEs must be capable of withstanding way more friction than guns.
Assuming that there won't be a significant portion of the military siding with the civilians is probably a bad mistake. The US military requires its officers and enlistees to swear to uphold the Constitution of the US and to obey all lawful orders. They are actually taught that they may be given unlawful ones and reminded about the Nurmberg trials.
Are there any countries that allow unrestricted ownership of weapons? I happen to live in the US and have never heard of a single legal jurisdiction within the US that allows unrestricted ownership of weapons. A quick search will show the honest seeker that fact.
Who said any kids should be allowed to do that?
I would think most honest geeks would love to see how far 3D printing can go in the realm of the engineering involved. How many gun-haters here realize the strength requirements being worked on and what kind of advances solving them entails for other areas requiring high-strength materials?
Rifles and handguns are useless for hunting or self-defense? WTF!
Those two purposes cover the design goal of the overwhelming majority of rifles and handguns.
Even if you were talking only about 3D printed ones, you are still way off base. Many modern hunting rifles are being built with as much polymer as possible to reduce weight and to better handle the elements. Have you ever actually looked into hunting to know that much of it happens in wet conditions? Do you realize the harmful effects wet conditions can have on the metal parts of a gun? Why would hunters not be looking for improvements in that area and why would that not be a legitimate desire?
Saying that the legitimate desire of a hunter becomes illegitimate because someone else may repurpose it for illegitimate purposes is like saying that all human communication is illegitimate because some people like to use communication to plan "evil" deeds.
I think that was my point.
We already have that. We call them double-cheeseburgers and they are readily available in every town in the US.
I would think that being a good vegeterian meant that you didn't crave meat. If you want meat that much, stop being trendy or whatever and eat meat.