Yes, but they don't have to deal with 50 individual, winner-take-all races over several hundred markets with three hundred million voters.
And, to be fair, most of the 1.1 Billion spent by the Obama campaign was spent on advertising slots and ground game (rental, printing). This wasn't really a $1 Billion startup, but rather a conduit for $1B in spending. It's like saying your stock broker is a billion dollar operation because he directs clients 401k money for a 10,000 person corporation.
...two for every soldier. We can work out the details of the contract later. I just need to get a promise from you that you will be creating manufacturing plants set up in no less than 6 states with senators on the armed services committee and we'll have someone contact you about the paperwork.
Um, no. It doesn't say what the pulse length is, but the sun is raining down 1.4kW/m^2 every second of every day on 1/2 the Earth. 50kW for a fraction of a second over a beam width of several centimeters or more is unlikely to cause any lasting effect. The actual vaporization of stuff is likely to be more detrimental (and, again, at these scales less significant than your community Independance Day fireworks show)
If you're not Linux savvy, you may need a second machine for serving up content and backup to a cloud service. I have an unRaid machine I've been running for nearly 10 years now. It's software RAID, so if one drive goes toes up you can just pop in a new drive and rebuild the old one from parity. It's easy to upgrade...I doubt if I even have a single one of my original drives.
Because this is a piece of mission critical hardware (includes both work files and the wife's TV shows), and because I'm not well versed in Linux, I don't run anything else on it. I have a second Windows machine which backs up personal/unrecoverable files to SpiderOak and to a local USB drive. That second machine also runs a Plex server (for feeding the 3 AppleTVs) as well as Sickbeard (TV show downloader) and Couch Potato (movie downloader).
The next awesome phone will not be a tech geek's wet dream. It will not have 40 custom notifications types. It will not be "customizable" or "programmable" as we currently know it. If Google shoots for the technology demo handset, it will miss the entire modern use for electronics, which is to simply be an extension of your mind. I don't mean that is some telepathic, sci-fi way, but rather a device which is so well integrated that the actual interface never gets in the way and doesn't require set up.
I'm glad you agree that the defender was reckless in his handling of his weapon - (1) and (3) of my original post, which are both correct.
You are incorrect, though - the defender had not finished firing - he kept pulling the trigger not knowing it was empty (according to the story). Although if only 3 shot firearms were available he would have been only two more rounds from out, and both men would have been (presumably) injured and unable to effectively cause lethal damage to the other.
I have friends on FB who appear to think that our current political situation is just as dire as in the Civil War, with things so important being argued that fighting could break out at any moment.
It's worth pointing out that we are currently arguing (aside from the Sandy Hook aftermath) over (1) whether everyone should have to have health care (2) whether the taxes we all paid back in 1999 - half of what they were in the 70s - should be reinstated (3) Whether the money we send to Washington should be spent on the elderly, the infirm, and the indigent, or should be reallocated to personal pet projects more suited to each representatives district and (4) If gay people can get married.
The actual political distance between the parties is rather wide, and yet the two candidates in the last election are so close together politically *based on their actual actions* you could have swapped them. Obama had the balls to call in the raid in Pakistan, is bombing the shit out of everyone he can point a drone at, and signed legislation to extend tax cuts and to allow firearms into national parks. Romney basically created the Affordable Healthcare Act when he was governor.
We, as a country, are arguing about - really - mostly trivial things. And yet everyone gets whipped into a frenzy about them because you've got to fill 24 hours of news somehow, and the only way to get people to do anything is to create a fever pitch over it.
What chance do you really think a consumer-legal weapon will have against the US armed forces?
An example: the Syrian government is doing pretty well at keeping their rebels at bay, and their rebels have far better weapons than those that are legal in the US, and big powers are enforcing a no-fly zone over the whole country. Who is going to enforce a no-fly zone in the US? Are your weapons with *greater* than 3 rounds going to be exceptionally useful against an M1 Abrams?
And, let's be honest, if some nut job takes over the White House, or the Army, or Marines - what is the chance that all of the men and women of the armed forces are actually going to go out and start killing US citizens? If you know your history, you know that the intent of the armed populace was really the prevent oppression from a power like the British monarchy - we were freshly off of a war with that government, which had not been "our own" for more than 100 years.
I'm all for an involved citizenry with checks and balances, but the conditions you appear to fear exist only in Hollywood and other entertainment venues (of which I count talk radio). If the conditions really DID exist that the people would get into a skirmish with the US military, I can guarantee you who I'd be placing my bet on. And it ain't the guys with the 90 round AR-15 magazine they bought from Cabelas.
There's a town in Georgia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia) which requires every house to have a weapon and a person trained in its use. It's about the same size as my town, which is pretty liberal biased (college town) and about the same size (30-35k pop).
It turns out that their violent crime rate is almost identical to ours, and their property crime rate is 25% higher. Anecdotal, yes, but arming the town seems not to have reduced crime at all. By your recommendation, there should have been zero violent crime, and only a small fraction of property crime.
Okay, AC - I read your little story, and it turns out only one shot was needed.
(1) The defender fired on an unknown assailant in pitch dark. That's actually grounds for revocation of a CC permit in about 14 states.
And I quote: "First shot grazed his trigger hand and damaged the base of his glock.40 cal causing the magazine to fall out. He didnt even realize and while running towards me pulling the trigger the only round he had left was in the chamber."
(2) The first shot disabled the opposing mans firearm, no more were actually required (3) If he had assumed a proper defensive position, he wound't have been in an all-out shootout. (4) If the first shot would not have hit home, it's unlikely the defender would have had a chance to fire more than three shots since the attacker was actively firing as well.
Congratulations...the ONE, unsubstantiated anecdote you found turns out to prove my point. Thank you.
I had a guy try to break into my apartment and I was waiting for him with my loaded pistol. Turns out he was drunk and was looking for a place to take a piss, and given the party outside I was not surprised. He left quietly.
No, I have yet to see a reasonable case for more than 3 rounds in a private weapon - i.e. non-law enforcement, non-military.
Multiple attackers. Well, if it's more than one on one, you're going to be shot by the other guy before you get three rounds off. Gang Bangers. See above. Poor aim. See my original comment. Bar fight. Really? Amid a bar full of bystanders, you're going to squeeze off multiple rounds? Talk about lack of training - you should work for the NYPD. Home invasion robbery. (1) poor aim, see original comment or (2) quit taking shots YOU DON'T HAVE Target practice. If you can't hit it on your first three shots, you probably should stop and re-center yourself anyway. You might as well reload at the same time. But they're non-lethal for 1-2 shots. If you're attacker is in close proximity and his/her progress isn't stopped in two shots, it's unlikely that you're going to survive regardless of the number of rounds remaining in your weapon when you get tackled and lose the ability to control your gun.
Most of those range from "nice" to "annoying" to "completely missing the point of firearms."
Better to limit all non-professional firearms to 3 rounds (shotgun, iirc, already are). I've never encountered a situation, and am at a loss for an actual, private-citizen, real-world situation, where more than 3 rounds would be necessary except in the case of an incompetent shooter (i.e. poor aim).
Depends on the planet composition. On the low end a 2x mass planet comprised of nothing but water (big ol' interstellar drop) would have 11x the volume, and a radius of 1.73 x earth, for a net gravity of 1.15x earth. If it were similar to the moon, you'd have 1.5x the radius, or gravity of 1.33x earth.
It's true. I have dealt with a large firm this year. And I'm looking to do work with an international player soon. Regardless, for certain size jobs (any more than ~2-3 weeks of production) I ask for money up front - and that is applied to my FINAL invoice, not progress billings. I probably will not do work for the aforementioned large firm again, as their AP procedures are too time consuming to navigate for a small shop like mine - or I will gross up my fees to account for the 80-100 overhead required.
An architect (for whom I rarely work because he is bad at paying), asked how I managed to get money up front. I told him I put it in my proposal. If the client is not serious enough, and well funded enough, to pay 1./2 me fee up front - maybe 0.5% of the overall project cost - how is he going to have the funds to pay me in a couple months when the work is complete? I also have enough work that I can walk away if I'm not happy with the terms.
Easy target (few adults), high profile. Its not always the case, though. The VT shooting (in my back yard) was carried out on a campus - and in classrooms - with a large percentage of trained military cadets.
Besides - if you wanted revenge, would you kill someone directly or kill their children? As I parent, I know what would be worse to me.
If I look at the cross section of my friends who are NRA members, most are Republicans. Of those, most are for limiting all government programs, but especially those which treat "fake" illnesses like mental instability. They post about how the government shouldn't be providing social services because it raises the taxes which chip away at the money they work for every day in their jobs.
Nobody in the NRA ever seems to be asking Congress to fund programs to evaluate and assist the mentally unstable. Quite the opposite, they're more likely to call them weirdos or outcasts or cheats, living off the government dole and asking for service after service for nothing. These are the same people who made fun of the little kid in high school, or hurled epithets from their truck window at the way they dress or called them godless fags as they walked by on the street.
And, for the record, a crazy fucker walking into a gym with a pipe bomb would be better. (1) the total death toll would have been lower and (2) the chance of the person going through with it would have been lower, as it's hard to light your own death fuse. It's why most suicide bombers don't actually activate their own explosives - they're remotely detonated by handlers.
You're reading it wrong: you presume that the tag "Stuff that matters" is somehow a parallel statement implying that because what is posted here is news which nerds would find relevant and interesting that, by definition, that material matters. One might make the same "mistake" with the wording of the 2nd amendment, which would imply that the right to bear arms is there as a necessity of the need to have a well regulated militia.
If you read it like the NRA reads the second amendment, however, then you realize that this site contains both news for nerds of a technically interesting nature AS WELL AS news which matters and is completely devoid of all technical content - completely separate things, mashed together for no reason at all.
Where do you draw the line? Heavy nukes? Light nukes? Missiles with high explosives? RPGs? Mass High explosives? Small quantities of High Explosives? Low Explosives? Gasoline? Paper and matches?
Nobody seems to agree where the line is on guns, and the constitution is very clear that it is not limited to rifles or handguns or RPGs or Tanks or nuclear arms. It is merely "arms."
The White House knows that leveraging the death of elementary school children for political purpose, even one they believe strongly in, on the day of their tragic death is a tactic which is likely to backfire. This is not a reactionary group at 1600 Penna. Ave., and they know the dangers.
The NRA can't say much because (1) guns were used in this massacre and unlike most public shootings (2) it's unreasonable even to them that 5-10 year olds (and elementary school teachers) should be packing heat during class.
That's the problem with people - complete lack of empathy.
The GP believes that he would have been there with his own firearms and gunned down these people. Or if all of the teachers had concealed carry he would have been taken out immediately. Or that if every child had had a gun, he would have been stopped before he even got his firearm out.
Many a gun proponent has been turned by having a spouse or child killed. The rest just don't believe it can ever happen to them.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but they don't have to deal with 50 individual, winner-take-all races over several hundred markets with three hundred million voters.
And, to be fair, most of the 1.1 Billion spent by the Obama campaign was spent on advertising slots and ground game (rental, printing). This wasn't really a $1 Billion startup, but rather a conduit for $1B in spending. It's like saying your stock broker is a billion dollar operation because he directs clients 401k money for a 10,000 person corporation.
...two for every soldier. We can work out the details of the contract later. I just need to get a promise from you that you will be creating manufacturing plants set up in no less than 6 states with senators on the armed services committee and we'll have someone contact you about the paperwork.
Um, no. It doesn't say what the pulse length is, but the sun is raining down 1.4kW/m^2 every second of every day on 1/2 the Earth. 50kW for a fraction of a second over a beam width of several centimeters or more is unlikely to cause any lasting effect. The actual vaporization of stuff is likely to be more detrimental (and, again, at these scales less significant than your community Independance Day fireworks show)
This. This. This.
If you're not Linux savvy, you may need a second machine for serving up content and backup to a cloud service. I have an unRaid machine I've been running for nearly 10 years now. It's software RAID, so if one drive goes toes up you can just pop in a new drive and rebuild the old one from parity. It's easy to upgrade...I doubt if I even have a single one of my original drives.
Because this is a piece of mission critical hardware (includes both work files and the wife's TV shows), and because I'm not well versed in Linux, I don't run anything else on it. I have a second Windows machine which backs up personal/unrecoverable files to SpiderOak and to a local USB drive. That second machine also runs a Plex server (for feeding the 3 AppleTVs) as well as Sickbeard (TV show downloader) and Couch Potato (movie downloader).
The next awesome phone will not be a tech geek's wet dream. It will not have 40 custom notifications types. It will not be "customizable" or "programmable" as we currently know it. If Google shoots for the technology demo handset, it will miss the entire modern use for electronics, which is to simply be an extension of your mind. I don't mean that is some telepathic, sci-fi way, but rather a device which is so well integrated that the actual interface never gets in the way and doesn't require set up.
And geeks will hate it.
I'm glad you agree that the defender was reckless in his handling of his weapon - (1) and (3) of my original post, which are both correct.
You are incorrect, though - the defender had not finished firing - he kept pulling the trigger not knowing it was empty (according to the story). Although if only 3 shot firearms were available he would have been only two more rounds from out, and both men would have been (presumably) injured and unable to effectively cause lethal damage to the other.
I have friends on FB who appear to think that our current political situation is just as dire as in the Civil War, with things so important being argued that fighting could break out at any moment.
It's worth pointing out that we are currently arguing (aside from the Sandy Hook aftermath) over (1) whether everyone should have to have health care (2) whether the taxes we all paid back in 1999 - half of what they were in the 70s - should be reinstated (3) Whether the money we send to Washington should be spent on the elderly, the infirm, and the indigent, or should be reallocated to personal pet projects more suited to each representatives district and (4) If gay people can get married.
The actual political distance between the parties is rather wide, and yet the two candidates in the last election are so close together politically *based on their actual actions* you could have swapped them. Obama had the balls to call in the raid in Pakistan, is bombing the shit out of everyone he can point a drone at, and signed legislation to extend tax cuts and to allow firearms into national parks. Romney basically created the Affordable Healthcare Act when he was governor.
We, as a country, are arguing about - really - mostly trivial things. And yet everyone gets whipped into a frenzy about them because you've got to fill 24 hours of news somehow, and the only way to get people to do anything is to create a fever pitch over it.
What chance do you really think a consumer-legal weapon will have against the US armed forces?
An example: the Syrian government is doing pretty well at keeping their rebels at bay, and their rebels have far better weapons than those that are legal in the US, and big powers are enforcing a no-fly zone over the whole country. Who is going to enforce a no-fly zone in the US? Are your weapons with *greater* than 3 rounds going to be exceptionally useful against an M1 Abrams?
And, let's be honest, if some nut job takes over the White House, or the Army, or Marines - what is the chance that all of the men and women of the armed forces are actually going to go out and start killing US citizens? If you know your history, you know that the intent of the armed populace was really the prevent oppression from a power like the British monarchy - we were freshly off of a war with that government, which had not been "our own" for more than 100 years.
I'm all for an involved citizenry with checks and balances, but the conditions you appear to fear exist only in Hollywood and other entertainment venues (of which I count talk radio). If the conditions really DID exist that the people would get into a skirmish with the US military, I can guarantee you who I'd be placing my bet on. And it ain't the guys with the 90 round AR-15 magazine they bought from Cabelas.
There's a town in Georgia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kennesaw,_Georgia) which requires every house to have a weapon and a person trained in its use. It's about the same size as my town, which is pretty liberal biased (college town) and about the same size (30-35k pop).
It turns out that their violent crime rate is almost identical to ours, and their property crime rate is 25% higher. Anecdotal, yes, but arming the town seems not to have reduced crime at all. By your recommendation, there should have been zero violent crime, and only a small fraction of property crime.
Okay, AC - I read your little story, and it turns out only one shot was needed.
(1) The defender fired on an unknown assailant in pitch dark. That's actually grounds for revocation of a CC permit in about 14 states.
And I quote: "First shot grazed his trigger hand and damaged the base of his glock .40 cal causing the magazine to fall out. He didnt even realize and while running towards me pulling the trigger the only round he had left was in the chamber."
(2) The first shot disabled the opposing mans firearm, no more were actually required
(3) If he had assumed a proper defensive position, he wound't have been in an all-out shootout.
(4) If the first shot would not have hit home, it's unlikely the defender would have had a chance to fire more than three shots since the attacker was actively firing as well.
Congratulations...the ONE, unsubstantiated anecdote you found turns out to prove my point. Thank you.
I had a guy try to break into my apartment and I was waiting for him with my loaded pistol. Turns out he was drunk and was looking for a place to take a piss, and given the party outside I was not surprised. He left quietly.
No, I have yet to see a reasonable case for more than 3 rounds in a private weapon - i.e. non-law enforcement, non-military.
Multiple attackers. Well, if it's more than one on one, you're going to be shot by the other guy before you get three rounds off.
Gang Bangers. See above.
Poor aim. See my original comment.
Bar fight. Really? Amid a bar full of bystanders, you're going to squeeze off multiple rounds? Talk about lack of training - you should work for the NYPD.
Home invasion robbery. (1) poor aim, see original comment or (2) quit taking shots YOU DON'T HAVE
Target practice. If you can't hit it on your first three shots, you probably should stop and re-center yourself anyway. You might as well reload at the same time.
But they're non-lethal for 1-2 shots. If you're attacker is in close proximity and his/her progress isn't stopped in two shots, it's unlikely that you're going to survive regardless of the number of rounds remaining in your weapon when you get tackled and lose the ability to control your gun.
And how is firing more than three rounds in succession *critical* to target shooting? It isn't.
When the amendment was written, what percentage of firearms were capable of holding more than three shots?
Most of those range from "nice" to "annoying" to "completely missing the point of firearms."
Better to limit all non-professional firearms to 3 rounds (shotgun, iirc, already are). I've never encountered a situation, and am at a loss for an actual, private-citizen, real-world situation, where more than 3 rounds would be necessary except in the case of an incompetent shooter (i.e. poor aim).
Depends on the planet composition. On the low end a 2x mass planet comprised of nothing but water (big ol' interstellar drop) would have 11x the volume, and a radius of 1.73 x earth, for a net gravity of 1.15x earth. If it were similar to the moon, you'd have 1.5x the radius, or gravity of 1.33x earth.
It's true. I have dealt with a large firm this year. And I'm looking to do work with an international player soon. Regardless, for certain size jobs (any more than ~2-3 weeks of production) I ask for money up front - and that is applied to my FINAL invoice, not progress billings. I probably will not do work for the aforementioned large firm again, as their AP procedures are too time consuming to navigate for a small shop like mine - or I will gross up my fees to account for the 80-100 overhead required.
An architect (for whom I rarely work because he is bad at paying), asked how I managed to get money up front. I told him I put it in my proposal. If the client is not serious enough, and well funded enough, to pay 1./2 me fee up front - maybe 0.5% of the overall project cost - how is he going to have the funds to pay me in a couple months when the work is complete? I also have enough work that I can walk away if I'm not happy with the terms.
Easy target (few adults), high profile. Its not always the case, though. The VT shooting (in my back yard) was carried out on a campus - and in classrooms - with a large percentage of trained military cadets.
Besides - if you wanted revenge, would you kill someone directly or kill their children? As I parent, I know what would be worse to me.
If I look at the cross section of my friends who are NRA members, most are Republicans. Of those, most are for limiting all government programs, but especially those which treat "fake" illnesses like mental instability. They post about how the government shouldn't be providing social services because it raises the taxes which chip away at the money they work for every day in their jobs.
Nobody in the NRA ever seems to be asking Congress to fund programs to evaluate and assist the mentally unstable. Quite the opposite, they're more likely to call them weirdos or outcasts or cheats, living off the government dole and asking for service after service for nothing. These are the same people who made fun of the little kid in high school, or hurled epithets from their truck window at the way they dress or called them godless fags as they walked by on the street.
And, for the record, a crazy fucker walking into a gym with a pipe bomb would be better. (1) the total death toll would have been lower and (2) the chance of the person going through with it would have been lower, as it's hard to light your own death fuse. It's why most suicide bombers don't actually activate their own explosives - they're remotely detonated by handlers.
Citation?
You're reading it wrong: you presume that the tag "Stuff that matters" is somehow a parallel statement implying that because what is posted here is news which nerds would find relevant and interesting that, by definition, that material matters. One might make the same "mistake" with the wording of the 2nd amendment, which would imply that the right to bear arms is there as a necessity of the need to have a well regulated militia.
If you read it like the NRA reads the second amendment, however, then you realize that this site contains both news for nerds of a technically interesting nature AS WELL AS news which matters and is completely devoid of all technical content - completely separate things, mashed together for no reason at all.
The question to ask is: if guns were freely and readily available in China, would there be FEWER deaths from these incidents?
Where do you draw the line? Heavy nukes? Light nukes? Missiles with high explosives? RPGs? Mass High explosives? Small quantities of High Explosives? Low Explosives? Gasoline? Paper and matches?
Nobody seems to agree where the line is on guns, and the constitution is very clear that it is not limited to rifles or handguns or RPGs or Tanks or nuclear arms. It is merely "arms."
The White House knows that leveraging the death of elementary school children for political purpose, even one they believe strongly in, on the day of their tragic death is a tactic which is likely to backfire. This is not a reactionary group at 1600 Penna. Ave., and they know the dangers.
The NRA can't say much because (1) guns were used in this massacre and unlike most public shootings (2) it's unreasonable even to them that 5-10 year olds (and elementary school teachers) should be packing heat during class.
This
That's the problem with people - complete lack of empathy.
The GP believes that he would have been there with his own firearms and gunned down these people. Or if all of the teachers had concealed carry he would have been taken out immediately. Or that if every child had had a gun, he would have been stopped before he even got his firearm out.
Many a gun proponent has been turned by having a spouse or child killed. The rest just don't believe it can ever happen to them.