So if you're driving an older car... you're helping save the enviorment.
Um... don't older cars get worse gas mileage than modern ones (especially the hybrid beasts with their 65+ mpg), therefore are more damaging to the environment?
As other folks pointed out, we humans can't (yet? ever?) destroy the earth, but we can certainly make it unable to support our form of life.
One last thing: "theories" are generally accepted by the scientific community until they are disproven. The semantics of the word does not lessen the idea behind it. The "theory of plate techtonics" is just that: a theory -- but some plates keep subducting and causing active vulcanism nonetheless.
For example, the privilege could be limited to people who have gone through the process of obtaining a state or federal concealed weapons permit. That portion of the population is much more likely to handle firearms responsibly.
I happen to live in such a state, and I've found that the methods they use to "screen" applicants, and the "intense" "training" they go through -- like anything else the government regulates (driver's license, home inspector's license, etc.) -- to be geared towards the lowest common denominator. Let me change your quote slightly to illustrate my point:
For example, the privilege could be limited to people who have gone through the process of obtaining a state
driver's license. That portion of the population is much more likely to handle a vehicle responsibly.
Would you argue that folks on the road -- the very same ones who change lanes without signaling, who drive drunk, who run red lights, or who get into the thousands of accidents per year are responsible? What if a single accident, a single mistake, could cause the death of several hundred folks in one blow?
Discharging a weapon while aboard an airliner in flight is not a trivial matter. Hitting the wrong thing can be potentially fatal.
I don't believe the average American is skilled enough to handle firearms or confront a terrorist -- just look at how well we handle frustrations while driving, er, road rage. More importantly, look at how well we handle a fearful situation (i.e., the threat of getting blown up in a fiery wreck): the entire travel industry is imploding, from the airlines on down the shoe-shine guy at the resort -- all from the fact that the induhviduals are all petrified of the hijackers lurking in every plane. How do you expect them to react if their fear became real? They only get one shot [yes, pun intended] to do the right thing, and if they don't, they're dead along with everyone else on the plane.
"Sure, your guilt might force you to vote Democrat, but secretly deep down
inside you long for the Republicans to lower your taxes, ignore the poor,
brutalize prisoners, dictate what goes on in your
bedrooms and rule you with an iron fist..."
--Sideshow Mel.
The hijacked airliners each had 5 to 6 hijackers and over 50 passengers. If even one in ten of them had been armed the hijackers would never have been able to take down the towers. And if an unknown fraction of the passengers had a habit of traveling armed the hijaclers never would have tried.
That assumes that people can handle themselves.
Ask any flight attendant if he or she would feel comfortable if the typical hunyuk--who overturns the cart because he got his booze cut off--also happens to be packing.
"Give meeee more alco-...[hic] alco-...[hic] alco-...[hic] aww, gimmie a drink [hic], damnit!" *BLAM*
If I have to give up some civil liberties in order to die of natural causes, so be it.
That's a mighty big if, Boone^. Would you agree to give up your rights for the illusion of safety? Would you be able to give up your right to keeping a secret--any secret--so you can avoid the chance that a crazy person will knock a building down on you?
Sorry, but life has no guarantees. We can put up all the guardrails we want, but you can still 'accidentally' run out into the street and kill yourself. If we put up enough guardrails, you might find yourself unable to run...even for your life.
Giving up your rights and the rights of your children's children is not only ineffective, but highly selfish and shortsighted.
They took away the second amendment, but I didn't complain since I had no guns.
They took away the third amendment, but I didn't complain because I didn't live near a military base.
They took away the fourth amendment, but I didn't complain because I hadn't broken any laws.
They took away the fifth amendment, but I didn't complain since I had nothing to fear from the courts.
They took away the sixth amendment, but I didn't complain because I wasn't in jail awaiting trial.
They took away the seventh amendment, but I didn't complain because I hated jury duty.
They took away the eighth amendment, but I didn't complain because I believed we needed to get tough on crime.
They took away the ninth amendment, but I didn't complain because I thought the law was too complicated to understand.
They took away the tenth amendment, but I didn't complain because I figured the government knew best.
Then they took away the first amendment, and I couldn't complain.
What does it matter? Anything the government doesn't need to know. If you could care less about your own rights, why do you bother to put your snailmail in envelopes? Just use postcards -- it's much cheaper. Why do you resist putting your government ID number, I mean social security number on all your checks, drivers license and sig? What do you have to hide?
What if you wanted to change the government legally, but had to meet in secret to prevent the government from foiling you? Ever heard of unions? Why do you think they have to meet in secret? The answer is that the companies would bust them up on the spot and beat up or fire the members.
Look, if you don't have anything to hide, why do you hide behind locked doors and anonymity?
If you are never able to eliminate all terrorist threats, why should the government restore your rights...ever?
Also, since the governement finds your rights to be expensive and a nusance to maintain, why not allow them to do away with all of them? It will make the government more efficient and they can pass the savings on to you!
Now serving number 54. Number 54. How do you plead?
[pause]
The verdict is guilty. Number 54, report to the liquidation center for sentencing.
Next!
Now serving number 55. Number 55. How do you plead?
[pause]
The verdict is guilty. Number 55, report to the liquidation center for sentencing.
"Trade" implies you get something in return. Guess what? You give up your rights (and your kids' rights...), you don't really get anything in return, 'cept a police state.
If you think giving up your civil liberties will give you security, then you're living in a dream world.
Q: What kind of car alarm will prevent a professional thief from taking your car? A: None! If the crooks want your car, you can't stop them.
Q: If you want to completely stop terrorism in this country, can you lock down all citizens, suspend the constitution and treat everyone as if they were guilty before proven innocent? A: You Sure can! Will it work? Nope.
Now, put on your brown shirt and start monitoring your neighbor!
The point is that we want to have a choice. If I want to give my name, addr and credit card number to the new company it takes, what, 10 minutes, max to fill out the new form.
How long does it take to get my data out of their #@$ing system? Forever, 'cause you can't do it!
When the time comes when you're able to voice your support for tools and methods to stop these methods of terrorism, don't be silent.
Don't you dare!
If we give up our freedom for security, then we'll just end up as a police state with NO increased safety.
Anyone who can hijack (at least) three planes simultaneously is a PROFESSIONAL, and--just as no car alarm will prevent a pro from taking your vehicle--no amount of jack-booted, machinegun-toting "peace police" stationed on every corner along with cameras and sniffers will protect your butt from terrorists.
You cannot remove the digital rights management code (not just software)
Sec. 103: Prohibited Acts
(a) Removal or Alteration of Security -- No person may --
(1) remove or alter any certified security technology in an interactive digital device; or
...so basically, if you hack your own box, you're breaking the law.
Screw that! Its my box, and no one is going to say how I can use it. I'll have to import all my components from Hong Kong, which means more trips to Canada and Mexico.
Slashdot Mirror
Check this out before you go: current Antartica weather.
You konw, you can always get a job in Antartica. There are two types of work periods: summer (3 months) or year-round.
If you take the latter, then you'll have to pass a phyche test. They wouldn't want you to crack and wander outside nekkid... :)
One that worked© and didn't crash?
Um... don't older cars get worse gas mileage than modern ones (especially the hybrid beasts with their 65+ mpg), therefore are more damaging to the environment?
Isn't that like flicking your cigarette butt out the car window so your ashtray doesn't get full?
It has actually been around about 4.6 billion years (age of the oldest rocks).
As other folks pointed out, we humans can't (yet? ever?) destroy the earth, but we can certainly make it unable to support our form of life.
One last thing: "theories" are generally accepted by the scientific community until they are disproven. The semantics of the word does not lessen the idea behind it. The "theory of plate techtonics" is just that: a theory -- but some plates keep subducting and causing active vulcanism nonetheless.
Yes, it's true: Windows 386 was faster than Windows 1.0 (or Windows 286, i.e., Windows 2.0).
It isn't, and the fact that this is true shouldn't amaze anyone, let alone merit an article on slashdot.
Face it: each successive version of Windows is Bloatware in Action© as billg & co rush to add the latest "customer-demanded features" to the pile. Why expect Windows XP to be different?
Maybe to sell eyeballs, 'cause you have the "scoop" on this "story"!
Harm is anything you don't like, don't agree with, or don't understand.
You ain't seen nothin' yet!
So, once they call, Big Bro' can track 'em from then on out until they switch cells, even if they hang up.
That's why it is not so simple. :^)
The point was so the Senate would answer to the states. Once this changed, the states lost most of their power, making the 10th amendment a joke.
Laudable goal, but I have one question:
How do you define abuse? Remember, this would be a law, so you have to cover every example.
I happen to live in such a state, and I've found that the methods they use to "screen" applicants, and the "intense" "training" they go through -- like anything else the government regulates (driver's license, home inspector's license, etc.) -- to be geared towards the lowest common denominator. Let me change your quote slightly to illustrate my point:
Would you argue that folks on the road -- the very same ones who change lanes without signaling, who drive drunk, who run red lights, or who get into the thousands of accidents per year are responsible? What if a single accident, a single mistake, could cause the death of several hundred folks in one blow?
Discharging a weapon while aboard an airliner in flight is not a trivial matter. Hitting the wrong thing can be potentially fatal.
I don't believe the average American is skilled enough to handle firearms or confront a terrorist -- just look at how well we handle frustrations while driving, er, road rage. More importantly, look at how well we handle a fearful situation (i.e., the threat of getting blown up in a fiery wreck): the entire travel industry is imploding, from the airlines on down the shoe-shine guy at the resort -- all from the fact that the induhviduals are all petrified of the hijackers lurking in every plane. How do you expect them to react if their fear became real? They only get one shot [yes, pun intended] to do the right thing, and if they don't, they're dead along with everyone else on the plane.
You are correct. I pressed submit just as I noticed the error. Oh well...
"Sure, your guilt might force you to vote Democrat, but secretly deep down inside you long for the Republicans to lower your taxes, ignore the poor, brutalize prisoners, dictate what goes on in your bedrooms and rule you with an iron fist..."
--Sideshow Mel.
That assumes that people can handle themselves.
Ask any flight attendant if he or she would feel comfortable if the typical hunyuk--who overturns the cart because he got his booze cut off--also happens to be packing.
"Give meeee more alco-...[hic] alco-...[hic] alco-...[hic] aww, gimmie a drink [hic], damnit!" *BLAM*
That's a mighty big if, Boone^.
Would you agree to give up your rights for the illusion of safety? Would you be able to give up your right to keeping a secret--any secret--so you can avoid the chance that a crazy person will knock a building down on you?
Sorry, but life has no guarantees. We can put up all the guardrails we want, but you can still 'accidentally' run out into the street and kill yourself. If we put up enough guardrails, you might find yourself unable to run...even for your life.
Giving up your rights and the rights of your children's children is not only ineffective, but highly selfish and shortsighted.
They took away the second amendment, but I didn't complain since I had no guns.
They took away the third amendment, but I didn't complain because I didn't live near a military base.
They took away the fourth amendment, but I didn't complain because I hadn't broken any laws.
They took away the fifth amendment, but I didn't complain since I had nothing to fear from the courts.
They took away the sixth amendment, but I didn't complain because I wasn't in jail awaiting trial.
They took away the seventh amendment, but I didn't complain because I hated jury duty.
They took away the eighth amendment, but I didn't complain because I believed we needed to get tough on crime.
They took away the ninth amendment, but I didn't complain because I thought the law was too complicated to understand.
They took away the tenth amendment, but I didn't complain because I figured the government knew best.
Then they took away the first amendment, and I couldn't complain.
But that was Nazi Germany. We wouldn't let that happen here. You might think this. But the danger of this happening is very real.
What does it matter? Anything the government doesn't need to know. If you could care less about your own rights, why do you bother to put your snailmail in envelopes? Just use postcards -- it's much cheaper. Why do you resist putting your government ID number, I mean social security number on all your checks, drivers license and sig? What do you have to hide?
What if you wanted to change the government legally, but had to meet in secret to prevent the government from foiling you? Ever heard of unions? Why do you think they have to meet in secret? The answer is that the companies would bust them up on the spot and beat up or fire the members.
Look, if you don't have anything to hide, why do you hide behind locked doors and anonymity?
If you are never able to eliminate all terrorist threats, why should the government restore your rights...ever?
Also, since the governement finds your rights to be expensive and a nusance to maintain, why not allow them to do away with all of them? It will make the government more efficient and they can pass the savings on to you!
Now serving number 54. Number 54. How do you plead?
[pause]
The verdict is guilty. Number 54, report to the liquidation center for sentencing.
Next!
Now serving number 55. Number 55. How do you plead?
[pause]
The verdict is guilty. Number 55, report to the liquidation center for sentencing.
Next!
Please post your social security number here. I guarantee your complete safety: trust me.
"Trade" implies you get something in return. Guess what? You give up your rights (and your kids' rights...), you don't really get anything in return, 'cept a police state.
If you think giving up your civil liberties will give you security, then you're living in a dream world.
Q: What kind of car alarm will prevent a professional thief from taking your car?
A: None! If the crooks want your car, you can't stop them.
Q: If you want to completely stop terrorism in this country, can you lock down all citizens, suspend the constitution and treat everyone as if they were guilty before proven innocent?
A: You Sure can! Will it work? Nope.
Now, put on your brown shirt and start monitoring your neighbor!
The point is that we want to have a choice. If I want to give my name, addr and credit card number to the new company it takes, what, 10 minutes, max to fill out the new form.
How long does it take to get my data out of their #@$ing system? Forever, 'cause you can't do it!
What kind of convenience is that?
Anyone have any clues? Fox news put up this web page.
Don't you dare!
If we give up our freedom for security, then we'll just end up as a police state with NO increased safety.
Anyone who can hijack (at least) three planes simultaneously is a PROFESSIONAL, and--just as no car alarm will prevent a pro from taking your vehicle--no amount of jack-booted, machinegun-toting "peace police" stationed on every corner along with cameras and sniffers will protect your butt from terrorists.
...so basically, if you hack your own box, you're breaking the law.
Screw that! Its my box, and no one is going to say how I can use it. I'll have to import all my components from Hong Kong, which means more trips to Canada and Mexico.
(sigh) Maybe I should just move to the Cayman.