Actually, despite the massively unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is because the US chose to fight jihadis on foreign soil.
Or it could be due to multiple factors. But even considering that, I'd have trouble believing some wouldn't slip by if they really wanted to. I think the secured cockpit doors and citizens who actually fight back are probably the biggest factors.
I would personally prefer this "humiliation" to losing one of my family members because one woman would rather be free from the pat-downs/security scanning etc.
So you're saying you'd rather have everyone who wants to get on a plane have their privacy violated because you're afraid of the minuscule chance that a terrorist might attack? I guess privacy isn't important at all as long as you can have your security theater.
But how about we install surveillance cameras in everyone's homes? It's for your own safety and could stop a few crimes, so it's all worth it. Rights mean nothing at all.
When was the last time you heard of an airplane hijack after we pumped up security?
When was the last time you heard of an airplane hijack since I received my anti-terrorist rock?
And more than likely, it's not because of the TSA's security theater, but because of secured cockpit doors and the willingness of citizens to fight back.
"crap, the comments are going to be filled with a bunch of nerds without kids freaking out about privacy"
Odd, because I looked at it and started thinking, "This article is going to have at least a few comments where someone basically says that if anyone disagrees with them, they're not parents."
Soooooooo.... we can each decide which laws are "reasonable" and break any we do not like... by declaring them "unreasonable"...
Yes. Very easily, in fact. The only requirement for doing so is that you have to be a living being capable of forming an opinion about something. Laws don't necessarily dictate morality, either.
So yes, it's very possible to decide that some laws are 'bad' while others are 'good' for yourself.
Every great thing you may want to do requires huge amounts of mindblowing boring work, and doing boring work is moething that we learn, it's not inate.
Right, so let's just force kids to watch paint dry and record its progress. Not only is it still a waste of time, but it would keep kids from actually learning anything useful!
You seem to be turning it around. Some people say that it doesn't apply to god, but it does to the universe. That doesn't mean that they think it doesn't apply to the universe.
So it's quite reasonable to believe in M-Theory & an infinite, eternal multiverse, based only on mathematical masturbation & very little to no direct evidence...but not an infinite, eternal creator that half the world seems to believe in...?
Who said that? I'd say the answer is this: I don't know. What's wrong with that? Why must a person start believing in random theories (god, made-up-on-the-spot scientific-sounding theories, etc.) just because they can't imagine another possibility for how the universe came to be (if it did)?
If someone wants to participate in a class action, that is their choice. It doesn't matter that you don't like class action lawsuits. I believe they should be added only if they say they want to be added, and that no idiotic ToS should be able to take that ability away.
If 10 hours per day is "barely any time" to do what you wanted then you were a horribly inefficient child and wasted your youth.
Don't forget busy work, socialization, and general play time. Oh, and don't forget that some people get so burned out because of school that they'd rather just laze around.
Slashdot Mirror
Who says they have to "slip by"?
I didn't mean slip by the TSA. I meant that I highly doubt that all of them would magically be trapped in the countries we have troops in.
Actually, despite the massively unpopular wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is because the US chose to fight jihadis on foreign soil.
Or it could be due to multiple factors. But even considering that, I'd have trouble believing some wouldn't slip by if they really wanted to. I think the secured cockpit doors and citizens who actually fight back are probably the biggest factors.
The wars are just a waste of money.
Yes, I do suppose this logic is "interesting."
I would personally prefer this "humiliation" to losing one of my family members because one woman would rather be free from the pat-downs/security scanning etc.
So you're saying you'd rather have everyone who wants to get on a plane have their privacy violated because you're afraid of the minuscule chance that a terrorist might attack? I guess privacy isn't important at all as long as you can have your security theater.
But how about we install surveillance cameras in everyone's homes? It's for your own safety and could stop a few crimes, so it's all worth it. Rights mean nothing at all.
When was the last time you heard of an airplane hijack after we pumped up security?
When was the last time you heard of an airplane hijack since I received my anti-terrorist rock?
And more than likely, it's not because of the TSA's security theater, but because of secured cockpit doors and the willingness of citizens to fight back.
Nice projection. You seem to be filling in an awful lot of blanks on your own, there, buddy.
Nice projection. You seem to be filling in an awful lot of blanks on your own, there, buddy.
You sound like you're not a True Parent.
"crap, the comments are going to be filled with a bunch of nerds without kids freaking out about privacy"
Odd, because I looked at it and started thinking, "This article is going to have at least a few comments where someone basically says that if anyone disagrees with them, they're not parents."
I am a father and wouldn't subject my son to this.
Then you're not a True Father.
Correct. If someone disagrees with me, they don't have kids. And all kids are the same. Bow down to my flawless logic!
Soooooooo.... we can each decide which laws are "reasonable" and break any we do not like... by declaring them "unreasonable"...
Yes. Very easily, in fact. The only requirement for doing so is that you have to be a living being capable of forming an opinion about something. Laws don't necessarily dictate morality, either.
So yes, it's very possible to decide that some laws are 'bad' while others are 'good' for yourself.
I don't see how that means it's stealing.
You're stealing from me.
Actually, they're raping you. To call it stealing makes rape seem less worse than it really is.
If you are accused of a crime in court you will end up having to pay legal fees.
The difference is that this isn't a court case and should not be handled by ISPs. That's just asking for abuse.
They should also be held liable when that police office gets killed or the suspect they are investigating commits a crime.
But only if the person who took the pictures was the murderer.
It looks to me like the TSA is committing more criminal activity than they are preventing.
Their job requires them to violate people's rights to begin with. I'd say that's criminal in and of itself.
It's the "rest of the class" who really need help.
And they won't get much help if our public education system remains as bad as it is.
He probably would have wasted less time and learned more. Of course, any excuse to keep the awful public education system as it is is sufficient...
Every great thing you may want to do requires huge amounts of mindblowing boring work, and doing boring work is moething that we learn, it's not inate.
Right, so let's just force kids to watch paint dry and record its progress. Not only is it still a waste of time, but it would keep kids from actually learning anything useful!
and serves no useful purpose if you're smart enough to just listen to the lecture and then ace the test.
Actually, it doesn't serve any useful purpose under any circumstances.
You seem to be turning it around. Some people say that it doesn't apply to god, but it does to the universe. That doesn't mean that they think it doesn't apply to the universe.
So it's quite reasonable to believe in M-Theory & an infinite, eternal multiverse, based only on mathematical masturbation & very little to no direct evidence...but not an infinite, eternal creator that half the world seems to believe in...?
Who said that? I'd say the answer is this: I don't know. What's wrong with that? Why must a person start believing in random theories (god, made-up-on-the-spot scientific-sounding theories, etc.) just because they can't imagine another possibility for how the universe came to be (if it did)?
I don't like your comment very much. Since I don't like it, I think it's in need of censorship!
If someone wants to participate in a class action, that is their choice. It doesn't matter that you don't like class action lawsuits. I believe they should be added only if they say they want to be added, and that no idiotic ToS should be able to take that ability away.
How invaluable. Glad I spent a year there when I could have been learning relevant things!
For 6 hours a day
For me, it was about 7 1/2.
If 10 hours per day is "barely any time" to do what you wanted then you were a horribly inefficient child and wasted your youth.
Don't forget busy work, socialization, and general play time. Oh, and don't forget that some people get so burned out because of school that they'd rather just laze around.
No, high school is there to make you memorize useless information and teach you how to take tests.