As the AC so aptly explained, responsibility only applies if you actually harm someone.
So as long as I'm a bad enough shot, I can go on as many shooting rampages as I like? Run as many red lights as I like until I crash into someone, or drive at whatever speed I want until I run someone down?
I'd really rather have the selfish and irresponsible be made to face up to the potential consequences of their actions before anyone comes to harm. In lieu of that, a slap on the wrist often does nicely.
Sooner or later, you'll learn that law has nothing to do with morality, ethics, innocence or guilt.
I really don't see how you've come to that conclusion.
It's purely utilitarian and mostly a utility of the fortunate to wield their power over everyone else.
Who are the "fortunate" you're referring to, what is this power they wield and what's so orgasmic to them about wielding it?
You fight all traffic tickets, even if you know you're 100% guilty because it is your right to a trial
You can fight all the tickets you want - I'll decide what I do about my own tickets, thanks.
fines and consequences are vastly disproportionate
I get the feeling that you mean that unqualified statement literally. However low you set any fine, some armchair anarchist somewhere will take as a provocation and an infringement on their personal liberty.
How does that justify a tip line for people to report suspected terrorist activity?
It doesn't. Don't the cops have a non-immediate-emergency number for this kind thing? 912? I made it a point to memorise the local police force's main phone number, which has come in handy a couple of times.
So we should be to do whatever we want, no matter how risky, and only have to face any consequences if we actually harm someone?
Perhaps in an ideal world where 99.999% of people acted rationally and sensibly all the time, we wouldn't need any of these pesky laws. Any wrongdoing could be judged on its own merits and society would be in complete harmony with the decision meted out. Ain't nobody got time for that, though, so we use arbitrary laws like "don't got more than 30mph here" to keep things running smoothly.
Driving in excess of the posted limit doesn't harm anyone
Neither does pissing through your letterbox but I suspect you'd want someone to be held responsible for it if it happened to you.
Does anyone know how yellow light times are calculated in the UK? Because the times listed in the article (3.0s at 25mph, 4.0s at 40mph) sound long to me.
I don't expect anyone to read TFAs, but you could at least read TFS;)
They shut the spacecraft down for a couple of weeks to give it a rest, in the hopes that the wheel’s lubricant would spread out and solve the problem. But when they turned it back on, the friction was still there.
I say slam it into the atmosphere at the most fireball-inducing angle and give everyone a free show. If that doesn't get kids interested in space science, I don't know what will.
Kepler was launched with four reaction wheels, but one failed last year after showing signs of erratic friction. Three wheels are required to keep Kepler properly and precisely aimed, and now there are only two.
Slashdot Mirror
And I'm sure it hurts YouTube every day knowing you're not there.
It shat rainbows in the old movies.
Why do people keep saying that JJ Trek 1 was a good movie?
Because other people have their own minds and their own opinions. You're not "right" and neither are they.
was a failure in several key areas, like believable physics
Yeah, because that's where Star Trek used to really shine.
How can we flame you without knowing your opinion?
Now when you see it every couple of minutes, and know it was digitally inserted, that sort of just makes no sense.
I thought they were all, or at least most, done in-camera.
That said what Abrams is doing is not a reboot... The new Doctor Who is a reboot.
In what sense is Trek not a reboot, but new Who is?
As the AC so aptly explained, responsibility only applies if you actually harm someone.
So as long as I'm a bad enough shot, I can go on as many shooting rampages as I like? Run as many red lights as I like until I crash into someone, or drive at whatever speed I want until I run someone down?
I'd really rather have the selfish and irresponsible be made to face up to the potential consequences of their actions before anyone comes to harm. In lieu of that, a slap on the wrist often does nicely.
Sooner or later, you'll learn that law has nothing to do with morality, ethics, innocence or guilt.
I really don't see how you've come to that conclusion.
It's purely utilitarian and mostly a utility of the fortunate to wield their power over everyone else.
Who are the "fortunate" you're referring to, what is this power they wield and what's so orgasmic to them about wielding it?
You fight all traffic tickets, even if you know you're 100% guilty because it is your right to a trial
You can fight all the tickets you want - I'll decide what I do about my own tickets, thanks.
fines and consequences are vastly disproportionate
I get the feeling that you mean that unqualified statement literally. However low you set any fine, some armchair anarchist somewhere will take as a provocation and an infringement on their personal liberty.
How does that justify a tip line for people to report suspected terrorist activity?
It doesn't. Don't the cops have a non-immediate-emergency number for this kind thing? 912? I made it a point to memorise the local police force's main phone number, which has come in handy a couple of times.
A newspaper report of statements by the police about the actions of these people seem very suspicious to me.
FTFY ;)
Quabbin, though... I dunno, sounds suspiciously Muslim to me.
Slipstream
Species
Thunderbirds
The Love Guru
The Dictator
Everyone's done some stinkers in their time.
Hello, chief. Let's talk, why not?
Unfortunately it makes speaking proper England unpossible.
If you harm someone, that's different
So we should be to do whatever we want, no matter how risky, and only have to face any consequences if we actually harm someone?
Perhaps in an ideal world where 99.999% of people acted rationally and sensibly all the time, we wouldn't need any of these pesky laws. Any wrongdoing could be judged on its own merits and society would be in complete harmony with the decision meted out. Ain't nobody got time for that, though, so we use arbitrary laws like "don't got more than 30mph here" to keep things running smoothly.
Driving in excess of the posted limit doesn't harm anyone
Neither does pissing through your letterbox but I suspect you'd want someone to be held responsible for it if it happened to you.
Why not? It doesn't know that the limbs attached to it are virtual, or that it is virtual.
Does anyone know how yellow light times are calculated in the UK? Because the times listed in the article (3.0s at 25mph, 4.0s at 40mph) sound long to me.
So no-one should ever accept responsibility for their own actions?
You might know the answer to this then: isn't there such a thing as too long a yellow light delay?
Both at the same time, surely?
They shut the spacecraft down for a couple of weeks to give it a rest, in the hopes that the wheel’s lubricant would spread out and solve the problem. But when they turned it back on, the friction was still there.
I say slam it into the atmosphere at the most fireball-inducing angle and give everyone a free show. If that doesn't get kids interested in space science, I don't know what will.
Kepler was launched with four reaction wheels, but one failed last year after showing signs of erratic friction. Three wheels are required to keep Kepler properly and precisely aimed, and now there are only two.
There you go.
That's what they said about the chances of anything coming from Mars (or was that landing on Mars?). But still...
Another Slashtard
It's usual to put your sig at the end of your posts.
A møøse once bit my sister.