A sane, rational, gun owner, is still a potential killer, no matter how you try to dress it up.
Every person is a potential killer. More people have been killed throughout history without guns than with. More people are killed every year by non-gun means than with a gun. Guns are not the leading killer, even in the "gun happy US". There are murders where you live, right?
A claim of 'but I only have it for self defence!' is still saying that you'd be prepared to kill someone, someday, in the right circumstances.
Are you claiming that you would not use lethal force to defend yourself, your spouse, or your kids if you were facing imminent grave danger, or would you fight to save them? Maybe you are prepared to kill someone, in the right circumstances?
I have no desire to use force on someone such that they may die, but that does not preclude me from using force on someone such that I, or those that I care about, may live.
I know it may sound crazy to you guys on the other side of the pond, but really, you would be much safer if you banned guns.
What you don't seem to know is that the genie does not go back inside the bottle. How many people on your side of the pond have guns? Let's cheat and give you the answer: a large number. Here is a hint on the demographics: it is not the people you want to meet.
I was in the military for 4 years (released because of a knee injury), and the first thing they taught us before we were given weapons on basic training was how to make it safe
The reason the military has such procedures is because they have to teach to the lowest common denominator, which is keeping a bunch of 18 year old dipshits that have never seen a gun from hurting themselves or others. How often were you actually given live ammunition?
The majority of accidents is due to unnecessary handling. Unloading your gun every night or even multiple times a day is by far not the safest method and increases your risk of shooting something you didn't intend to shoot. Keep the gun in retention holster and put both in the safe. Do the opposite in the morning. No safety issue, and no negligent discharges.
* -- I don't believe weapons should be in the hands of people who don't train and recertify in their use on a regular basis, and I don't think that handguns should be in the hands of civilians at all, but it's not germane to the point I'm making, so let's simply accept the current situation and not get bogged down with what should or shouldn't be.
All you can do is make sure there are no guns in your hands. Just because you do not know what you are doing doesn't mean that everyone is clueless.
I suppose you're one of those people who won't leave their rooms when a fire alarm goes off in case it's a trap?
Paranoia is funny and everything, but unless you're a spy or criminal it's an unhealthy way of living your life.
Do you do everything everyone tells you without a bit of consideration? Would you open your hotel room door for "hotel security" without even thinking about whether or not the demand is legitimate?
I do not open any door immediately when I am not expecting someone. If "hotel security" knocks on my door they need to have ID, a good reason for me to open the door, and quite possibly verification from the front desk that security is indeed supposed to be at my room.
If you believe taking a basic bit of precaution to ensure one's own safety is paranoia then you have far more problems than what you accuse me of. It sounds as though you are the other end of the spectrum and live with your head planted firmly in the sand.
The point is that someone knocking on the door and saying "Hotel security. Open the door, please" only works when the person in the room is a complete moron.
Considering that 99.9% of people that "complain" about Apple products buy at least one anyway, I doubt Apple gives much of a shit about the concerns expressed here.
Henry Ford said something like "They can have any color they want, as long as it is black." That is the situation we are in and why you cannot appeal to a free market argument.
Does Ford currently sell cars in colors other than black? That is the free market for you. Ford sold only black because it cut his costs and made the manufacturing line more efficient. Enter the free market with other manufacturers making cars other than black and suddenly Ford offers cars in different colors. That is exactly how the free market works.
Browsing the phones available from different carriers makes your argument seem completely ridiculous.
Department of Justice filed a separate lawsuit against the individual who had received the NSL, requesting that the court order the recipient to comply with the NSL and asking the court to find that the 'failure to comply with a lawfully issued National Security Letter interferes with the United States' vindication of its sovereign interests in law enforcement, counterintelligence, and protecting national security.'
NSLs are issued by law enforcement with neither judicial oversight nor probable cause
Yeah, let's let Amazon get a monopoly so they can jack up prices. Or do you morons actually think they'll keep their prices so low after running out of business the alternatives?
You seem to think that once a business gets to the top of their space and starts acting stupid no one knocks them off. You seem oblivious that Sears used to be the retail giant with stores everywhere that couldn't be topped.
As long as Amazon is doing it better then I am all for them expanding.
The first problem is in the name. There is nothing "warrior" about "American Ninja Warrior". I understand their chose because it wouldn't sound as interesting to the target audience to call it "American Ninja Gymnast".
If the incompetent designers don't get their shit together you're going to see gov't get involved.
That will certainly fix it. I can't wait for a bunch of lawmakers that think SQL is some sort of 'dirty text talk the kids use' to secure us online. No one can be sure what they will come up with, but the odds are pretty strong it would include a full body scan (with the ability to opt-out and get groped by the TSA instead) to get on the internet.
presumably the traders wouldn't allow their sale price to drop below the cost of the item plus the marginal expense to sell on Amazon
Presumptions are dangerous. There are many instances where items are sold below cost.
To your point, there should be a floor price and/or a cap on the number of units sold at the discount prices. In reality the sellers are not always as forward thinking as you would expect them to be and the "flash crash" situations occur.
No matter how you spin it, capitalising 'Jack' makes it 100% certain that Jack is a person, not an action.
There are very few things in life that are 100% certain. If the writer cannot use punctuation properly there is no certainty they can use the capitalization correctly.
It was stated well in an earlier comment that the importance of grammar is up to the reader. I am interviewing an engineering candidate later today and part of the interview is to provide a writing sample. So, is grammar important? Only if he wants the job.
basic maintenance like oiling, lubing and changing wear parts or machining tools every so often
Once again, it would appear as though someone with no concept of high tech manufacturing is making assumptions about how things are made. Even most machine maintenance in a chip plant is done by folks with post-high school education, and you would be surprised at the numbers of educated engineers turning wrenches to keep some of the complex machines running well. Even emptying trash cans has some degree of skill to it as the person dumping the cans has to be trained regarding protocols that, if not followed, could have a significant negative impact on production yield.
To the point you seem to be making though, if you follow the chain down far enough you find "unskilled" labor. Those jobs do not get outsourced, they get lost. Building up manufacturing capability and providing more jobs for unskilled labor is an overall benefit as well.
A statement made by someone who clearly has no understanding of manufacturing.
We spent years transitioning manufacturing offshore. Building factories, transferring knowledge, and building the skill of the workforce. Now we complain we can't manufacture anything.
I really wish you were right about manufacturing being menial. That would mean it is a trivial task to start making things here. Unfortunately you are quite mistaken.
Well, I could walk over and look at you dumb power meter to see how much power you are using. But that's OK since I'm not using wi-fi and a laptop, right?
Those meters are expensive and they're not providing them out of the goodness of their heart.
Correct. it is all about profit. The smart meters are far less expensive then overbuilding infrastructure and/or generating too much or too little power based on demand.
While it's definitely the power company's right to know how much power I'm using, and even to know in aggregate how much peak versus non-peak power I'm using, but they really shouldn't need to know hour by hour or minute by minute (or even day by day) how much power I'm using.
They already have instrumentation at the substations that tells them how much power my neighborhood is using so they know how much power to generate, they don't need to know when I'm doing laundry, when I go to work, when my house is vacant because I'm on vacation, etc.
Yeah, it is obvious the power company in intent on stealing secrets about your laundry habits rather than trying to balance infrastructure cost and capability.
Those sons-a-bitches should quit trying to provide you with better service and let you live in peace. Call and tell them to disconnect you from the grid altogether. Install PV on your roof and keep those nosy power company bastards at bay!
Given the fundamentals here there is no reason to be concerned about the safety of terahertz radiation. It is certainly far safer than the alternatives which have large known risks.
Not quite. Terahertz radiation is by no means "certainly far safer" than choosing not to be irradiated by any method.
When the fire department puts out a fire, they stop all the other houses in the neighborhood from burning down. Is this a concept you find too difficult to understand?
It appears as though you wanted to contradict my point, but you underscored it. This is exactly the way things work relative to taxes and "benefits" derived from taxation. You are fucked, but someone else wins. The only difference you have proposed is that you choose to view the situation from the "how I might win" side versus the "how this might bite me" side.
police do, in fact, for the most part prevent and investigate crimes
Investigate, yes. Prevent, no. Crime has little to do with the number of police present. Crime rates are influenced much more by sociological and economic factors. Or, by your logic, we could deputize everyone and eradicate crime forever. Why didn't we think of that sooner?
your statement boggles my mind
That does not make my statements incorrect. Should I speak slower?
Slashdot Mirror
A sane, rational, gun owner, is still a potential killer, no matter how you try to dress it up.
Every person is a potential killer. More people have been killed throughout history without guns than with. More people are killed every year by non-gun means than with a gun. Guns are not the leading killer, even in the "gun happy US". There are murders where you live, right?
A claim of 'but I only have it for self defence!' is still saying that you'd be prepared to kill someone, someday, in the right circumstances.
Are you claiming that you would not use lethal force to defend yourself, your spouse, or your kids if you were facing imminent grave danger, or would you fight to save them? Maybe you are prepared to kill someone, in the right circumstances?
I have no desire to use force on someone such that they may die, but that does not preclude me from using force on someone such that I, or those that I care about, may live.
I know it may sound crazy to you guys on the other side of the pond, but really, you would be much safer if you banned guns.
What you don't seem to know is that the genie does not go back inside the bottle. How many people on your side of the pond have guns? Let's cheat and give you the answer: a large number. Here is a hint on the demographics: it is not the people you want to meet.
I was in the military for 4 years (released because of a knee injury), and the first thing they taught us before we were given weapons on basic training was how to make it safe
The reason the military has such procedures is because they have to teach to the lowest common denominator, which is keeping a bunch of 18 year old dipshits that have never seen a gun from hurting themselves or others. How often were you actually given live ammunition?
The majority of accidents is due to unnecessary handling. Unloading your gun every night or even multiple times a day is by far not the safest method and increases your risk of shooting something you didn't intend to shoot. Keep the gun in retention holster and put both in the safe. Do the opposite in the morning. No safety issue, and no negligent discharges.
* -- I don't believe weapons should be in the hands of people who don't train and recertify in their use on a regular basis, and I don't think that handguns should be in the hands of civilians at all, but it's not germane to the point I'm making, so let's simply accept the current situation and not get bogged down with what should or shouldn't be.
All you can do is make sure there are no guns in your hands. Just because you do not know what you are doing doesn't mean that everyone is clueless.
I suppose you're one of those people who won't leave their rooms when a fire alarm goes off in case it's a trap? Paranoia is funny and everything, but unless you're a spy or criminal it's an unhealthy way of living your life.
Do you do everything everyone tells you without a bit of consideration? Would you open your hotel room door for "hotel security" without even thinking about whether or not the demand is legitimate?
I do not open any door immediately when I am not expecting someone. If "hotel security" knocks on my door they need to have ID, a good reason for me to open the door, and quite possibly verification from the front desk that security is indeed supposed to be at my room.
If you believe taking a basic bit of precaution to ensure one's own safety is paranoia then you have far more problems than what you accuse me of. It sounds as though you are the other end of the spectrum and live with your head planted firmly in the sand.
AC, if you've got a comment, you didn't make that comment. Someone else made that happen.
Because you can't read.
Did you hear that loud "whoosh" noise?
The point is that someone knocking on the door and saying "Hotel security. Open the door, please" only works when the person in the room is a complete moron.
Considering that 99.9% of people that "complain" about Apple products buy at least one anyway, I doubt Apple gives much of a shit about the concerns expressed here.
I thought the wealth was supposed to trickle down?
Apparently you have been asleep for a few decades. This is Hope and Change!
Henry Ford said something like "They can have any color they want, as long as it is black." That is the situation we are in and why you cannot appeal to a free market argument.
Does Ford currently sell cars in colors other than black? That is the free market for you. Ford sold only black because it cut his costs and made the manufacturing line more efficient. Enter the free market with other manufacturers making cars other than black and suddenly Ford offers cars in different colors. That is exactly how the free market works.
Browsing the phones available from different carriers makes your argument seem completely ridiculous.
Department of Justice filed a separate lawsuit against the individual who had received the NSL, requesting that the court order the recipient to comply with the NSL and asking the court to find that the 'failure to comply with a lawfully issued National Security Letter interferes with the United States' vindication of its sovereign interests in law enforcement, counterintelligence, and protecting national security.'
NSLs are issued by law enforcement with neither judicial oversight nor probable cause
Time for the supreme court to strike NSLs down.
Please keep your logic out of blatant attempts to further bait class warfare.
Yeah, let's let Amazon get a monopoly so they can jack up prices. Or do you morons actually think they'll keep their prices so low after running out of business the alternatives?
You seem to think that once a business gets to the top of their space and starts acting stupid no one knocks them off. You seem oblivious that Sears used to be the retail giant with stores everywhere that couldn't be topped.
As long as Amazon is doing it better then I am all for them expanding.
The first problem is in the name. There is nothing "warrior" about "American Ninja Warrior". I understand their chose because it wouldn't sound as interesting to the target audience to call it "American Ninja Gymnast".
If the incompetent designers don't get their shit together you're going to see gov't get involved.
That will certainly fix it. I can't wait for a bunch of lawmakers that think SQL is some sort of 'dirty text talk the kids use' to secure us online. No one can be sure what they will come up with, but the odds are pretty strong it would include a full body scan (with the ability to opt-out and get groped by the TSA instead) to get on the internet.
presumably the traders wouldn't allow their sale price to drop below the cost of the item plus the marginal expense to sell on Amazon
Presumptions are dangerous. There are many instances where items are sold below cost.
To your point, there should be a floor price and/or a cap on the number of units sold at the discount prices. In reality the sellers are not always as forward thinking as you would expect them to be and the "flash crash" situations occur.
But the commas are unnecessary.
The commas are only unnecessary if you ignore proper grammar.
"Helping your Uncle Jack off his horse." and
"Helping your Uncle, Jack, off his horse." are not the same thing.
No matter how you spin it, capitalising 'Jack' makes it 100% certain that Jack is a person, not an action.
There are very few things in life that are 100% certain. If the writer cannot use punctuation properly there is no certainty they can use the capitalization correctly.
It was stated well in an earlier comment that the importance of grammar is up to the reader. I am interviewing an engineering candidate later today and part of the interview is to provide a writing sample. So, is grammar important? Only if he wants the job.
The commas aren't strictly necessary - capitalisation is sufficient to convey meaning in that example.
Says the guy who Helps his Uncle Jack off the Horse daily.
Upper case letters are no substitute for punctuation.
basic maintenance like oiling, lubing and changing wear parts or machining tools every so often
Once again, it would appear as though someone with no concept of high tech manufacturing is making assumptions about how things are made. Even most machine maintenance in a chip plant is done by folks with post-high school education, and you would be surprised at the numbers of educated engineers turning wrenches to keep some of the complex machines running well. Even emptying trash cans has some degree of skill to it as the person dumping the cans has to be trained regarding protocols that, if not followed, could have a significant negative impact on production yield.
To the point you seem to be making though, if you follow the chain down far enough you find "unskilled" labor. Those jobs do not get outsourced, they get lost. Building up manufacturing capability and providing more jobs for unskilled labor is an overall benefit as well.
All manufacturing is menial work.
A statement made by someone who clearly has no understanding of manufacturing.
We spent years transitioning manufacturing offshore. Building factories, transferring knowledge, and building the skill of the workforce. Now we complain we can't manufacture anything.
I really wish you were right about manufacturing being menial. That would mean it is a trivial task to start making things here. Unfortunately you are quite mistaken.
Well, I could walk over and look at you dumb power meter to see how much power you are using. But that's OK since I'm not using wi-fi and a laptop, right?
Those meters are expensive and they're not providing them out of the goodness of their heart.
Correct. it is all about profit. The smart meters are far less expensive then overbuilding infrastructure and/or generating too much or too little power based on demand.
You know it isn't that hard to tell if someone is home or not while driving past your house, smart meter or not installed, right?
While it's definitely the power company's right to know how much power I'm using, and even to know in aggregate how much peak versus non-peak power I'm using, but they really shouldn't need to know hour by hour or minute by minute (or even day by day) how much power I'm using.
They already have instrumentation at the substations that tells them how much power my neighborhood is using so they know how much power to generate, they don't need to know when I'm doing laundry, when I go to work, when my house is vacant because I'm on vacation, etc.
Yeah, it is obvious the power company in intent on stealing secrets about your laundry habits rather than trying to balance infrastructure cost and capability.
Those sons-a-bitches should quit trying to provide you with better service and let you live in peace. Call and tell them to disconnect you from the grid altogether. Install PV on your roof and keep those nosy power company bastards at bay!
Given the fundamentals here there is no reason to be concerned about the safety of terahertz radiation. It is certainly far safer than the alternatives which have large known risks.
Not quite. Terahertz radiation is by no means "certainly far safer" than choosing not to be irradiated by any method.
When the fire department puts out a fire, they stop all the other houses in the neighborhood from burning down. Is this a concept you find too difficult to understand?
It appears as though you wanted to contradict my point, but you underscored it. This is exactly the way things work relative to taxes and "benefits" derived from taxation. You are fucked, but someone else wins. The only difference you have proposed is that you choose to view the situation from the "how I might win" side versus the "how this might bite me" side.
police do, in fact, for the most part prevent and investigate crimes
Investigate, yes. Prevent, no. Crime has little to do with the number of police present. Crime rates are influenced much more by sociological and economic factors. Or, by your logic, we could deputize everyone and eradicate crime forever. Why didn't we think of that sooner?
your statement boggles my mind
That does not make my statements incorrect. Should I speak slower?