America is no longer a place of ideals. It no longer is a place where liberty and freedom are real things, bought and paid for with blood.
It never was. We had slavery, internment camps, discrimination, and at *any* point in our history (including the cold war), people's freedoms and the constitution were being violated in exchange for 'safety' of some kind. There are still too many problems to fix before we'll ever be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave.'
The GP is only pointing out that "The Government" never sends anyone a bill without reason
That sort of stupidity has no business existing. The government put Japanese-American citizens in internment camps, spied on civil rights and anti-war activists, is doing all sorts of unconstitutional things, and yet they can't send people a bill without a reason? Why not? Something like that would be absolutely trivial compared to their other human rights violations.
Not saying it's true, but to claim that it can't happen is just insane.
How is that not a good argument? Imagining what the founding fathers would have done in response to X, and taking into account some history and similar events, is a very good way to try to get a grasp on the spirit of the constitution. What do you suggest, ignoring the spirit of the constitution and just letting the government do as it pleases because "times have changed"? What does that even mean?
Prove it. Prove that their actions are unconstitutional.
*sigh*
You won't ever accept any argument I put forth, including ones about the spirit of the constitution, because you mindlessly appeal to authority to get all the answers, even though authority can and has been wrong countless times. I bet you'd even accept it if the Supreme Court suddenly ruled that the first amendment doesn't protect political speech. You're a drone with no mind of his own.
In the end, it's up to the people to make sure the government follows the constitution. Judges and politicians can (eventually) be replaced and, if necessary, the constitution can be amended (even though it shouldn't be necessary, it can be done for clarification to silence judges who are complicit in the crimes against the American people).
But that is not an answer you will accept, as authority figures are always right. They cannot be questioned.
If you want to suggest a better filter then go ahead but I doubt you have one that will work.
How about the one at the company I work at, where they simply test to see whether or not the employees know what they're doing? We even provide training as long as the individual is salvageable. One of the benefits is that you also avoid the 99% of college students who are absolute garbage. And if it's a company that has too many applicants, then the ones with actual experience can be put into a separate pile, and then the rest randomly thrown out. It's a better method than mindlessly depending on pieces of paper.
I know it's hard to believe, but there was a time when fewer employers were mentally retarded. All requiring degrees does is turn colleges into half-assed trade schools that people go to because they think it'll get them a job, defeating the point of college entirely. So there's another benefit of not going along with this nonsense.
Maybe, but that's mainly because the "no degree" group is filled with idiots who have no desire to learn. The risk is lessened when you filter out those individuals.
The NSA is, at this very moment, violating the constitution and people's rights by conducting mass surveillance on almost everyone. In what way is pointing this out and saying it is a bad thing in any way silly?
We're supposed to be 'the land of the free.' Our constitution only gives the government limited powers. Why is that? Because governments can't be trusted, and authority will be abused. We have to be cautious of the powers the government actually does have, let alone the ones that it just takes for itself. Distrust of government is a very important principle of this country, and it's also completely rational considering the hundreds of millions of people abused and/or killed by governments throughout history. I have to point this out so many times because you people are ignorant and believe the government is full of perfect little angels who could never abuse their powers or make mistakes, which ignores history entirely.
Delusional? The NSA is violating people's rights and the highest law of the land, and it's happening right this instant. Are you saying that it is not happening? If not, then how is he delusional? If you allow it to happen, and they continue doing it, then you don't really have those freedoms, now do you?
He's no patriot, he's just a cowardly little shit.
Revealing the government's evil and unconstitutional activities makes you a cowardly little shit? I suppose, in your mind, mindlessly obeying the government is a good example of a patriot in 'the land of the free and the home of the brave'? He sure did a hell of a lot more than you, you authoritarian imbecile.
I personally really advise people to *not* try to go through the internal channels. That alerts them that you're trying to stop what they're doing, and they could put an end to you right there, which decreases the chances that the American people will ever know. The first people to know should be The People. Going through the 'proper channels' is just foolish and unnecessary.
put in place by legislatures elected by the people.
When you have an awful two-party system where a grand majority of people mindlessly vote for one party or the other, and a significant amount of people do so because they believe the other guy is slightly more evil, does it really matter whether or not it was put in place by legislatures elected by the people? Most 'minor' issues get ignored in favor of hot topic issues like abortion, so there's no guarantee that people support even a majority of policies of the candidate they voted for. Besides, I'd say some of this is the result of outright bribery.
Just saying that I don't think mentioning that was relevant, considering the current (and past) state of affairs.
I've seen similar things with college-educated "experts." "Experts" will be "experts" no matter what education they received, because they half-ass everything.
In 'the land of the free,' freedom is more important than safety. Otherwise, it wouldn't be the land of the free. You seem to think otherwise, and think the government should just ignore the constitution--the very document that allows it to exist at all--so it can provide 'security.' Perhaps North Korea would be more to your liking?
He was also a scumbag who cared more about security than freedom. In other words, he was not someone who belonged in a country that's supposed to be 'the land of the free.'
You might want to take that up with Austria, Finland, Israel, Norway and Greece, amongst others [wikipedia.org].
I would if I lived in those places. It's anti-freedom.
Note that the US (unlike many other countries) does most emphatically not have compulsory military service.
Straw man. The draft was used in the past, and it could be used again.
So, your call for a constitutional amendment seems rather ridiculous.
No, it's not. It could be used again. And since the draft is (considered to be) constitutional, it's best to ban such an evil practice with a constitutional amendment to settle the matter once and for all.
No, you assume that because people here make money off of it, it inherently goes back into the economy.
The two options are 1) create jobs or 2) welfare payments 2 is pretty much digging holes in the ground with spoons, without the digging.
How about creating useful jobs that don't involve murder and making weapons designed for murder? Our military is too large, and it really is little more than welfare. I'm morally opposed to the military's size as it is now. No amount of 'But it goes back into the 'conomy!' will change that.
To compare spam filters and such with seizing a company's assets using the power of government thugs is absolutely absurd. I'd say you seem like a shill, but in reality, that's wishful thinking on my part. Shills and the mentally challenged are often indistinguishable.
How is giving the money back to the citizens stealing?
The government steals money ("taxation") from people at gunpoint, and then uses it to fund their pointless battles and (largely wasteful) military. It doesn't matter how much money they 'give back' (which is almost fucking none, anyway). Why not just have the government pay people to dig giant holes in the ground with spoons? They'd be giving money back to citizens!
Slashdot Mirror
So it's reasonable to say that Hollywood's efforts to control piracy is working quite well.
Without hard scientific proof of that, no, it is not reasonable.
America is no longer a place of ideals. It no longer is a place where liberty and freedom are real things, bought and paid for with blood.
It never was. We had slavery, internment camps, discrimination, and at *any* point in our history (including the cold war), people's freedoms and the constitution were being violated in exchange for 'safety' of some kind. There are still too many problems to fix before we'll ever be 'the land of the free and the home of the brave.'
The GP is only pointing out that "The Government" never sends anyone a bill without reason
That sort of stupidity has no business existing. The government put Japanese-American citizens in internment camps, spied on civil rights and anti-war activists, is doing all sorts of unconstitutional things, and yet they can't send people a bill without a reason? Why not? Something like that would be absolutely trivial compared to their other human rights violations.
Not saying it's true, but to claim that it can't happen is just insane.
How is that not a good argument? Imagining what the founding fathers would have done in response to X, and taking into account some history and similar events, is a very good way to try to get a grasp on the spirit of the constitution. What do you suggest, ignoring the spirit of the constitution and just letting the government do as it pleases because "times have changed"? What does that even mean?
Prove it. Prove that their actions are unconstitutional.
*sigh*
You won't ever accept any argument I put forth, including ones about the spirit of the constitution, because you mindlessly appeal to authority to get all the answers, even though authority can and has been wrong countless times. I bet you'd even accept it if the Supreme Court suddenly ruled that the first amendment doesn't protect political speech. You're a drone with no mind of his own.
In the end, it's up to the people to make sure the government follows the constitution. Judges and politicians can (eventually) be replaced and, if necessary, the constitution can be amended (even though it shouldn't be necessary, it can be done for clarification to silence judges who are complicit in the crimes against the American people).
But that is not an answer you will accept, as authority figures are always right. They cannot be questioned.
They can listen all they want
Nope, because that in itself is a constitutional violation.
If you want to suggest a better filter then go ahead but I doubt you have one that will work.
How about the one at the company I work at, where they simply test to see whether or not the employees know what they're doing? We even provide training as long as the individual is salvageable. One of the benefits is that you also avoid the 99% of college students who are absolute garbage. And if it's a company that has too many applicants, then the ones with actual experience can be put into a separate pile, and then the rest randomly thrown out. It's a better method than mindlessly depending on pieces of paper.
I know it's hard to believe, but there was a time when fewer employers were mentally retarded. All requiring degrees does is turn colleges into half-assed trade schools that people go to because they think it'll get them a job, defeating the point of college entirely. So there's another benefit of not going along with this nonsense.
Maybe, but that's mainly because the "no degree" group is filled with idiots who have no desire to learn. The risk is lessened when you filter out those individuals.
The NSA is, at this very moment, violating the constitution and people's rights by conducting mass surveillance on almost everyone. In what way is pointing this out and saying it is a bad thing in any way silly?
We're supposed to be 'the land of the free.' Our constitution only gives the government limited powers. Why is that? Because governments can't be trusted, and authority will be abused. We have to be cautious of the powers the government actually does have, let alone the ones that it just takes for itself. Distrust of government is a very important principle of this country, and it's also completely rational considering the hundreds of millions of people abused and/or killed by governments throughout history. I have to point this out so many times because you people are ignorant and believe the government is full of perfect little angels who could never abuse their powers or make mistakes, which ignores history entirely.
Delusional? The NSA is violating people's rights and the highest law of the land, and it's happening right this instant. Are you saying that it is not happening? If not, then how is he delusional? If you allow it to happen, and they continue doing it, then you don't really have those freedoms, now do you?
He's no patriot, he's just a cowardly little shit.
Revealing the government's evil and unconstitutional activities makes you a cowardly little shit? I suppose, in your mind, mindlessly obeying the government is a good example of a patriot in 'the land of the free and the home of the brave'? He sure did a hell of a lot more than you, you authoritarian imbecile.
I personally really advise people to *not* try to go through the internal channels. That alerts them that you're trying to stop what they're doing, and they could put an end to you right there, which decreases the chances that the American people will ever know. The first people to know should be The People. Going through the 'proper channels' is just foolish and unnecessary.
And yet they don't seem to have any problem violating the fundamental rights of nearly everyone in and outside the US.
put in place by legislatures elected by the people.
When you have an awful two-party system where a grand majority of people mindlessly vote for one party or the other, and a significant amount of people do so because they believe the other guy is slightly more evil, does it really matter whether or not it was put in place by legislatures elected by the people? Most 'minor' issues get ignored in favor of hot topic issues like abortion, so there's no guarantee that people support even a majority of policies of the candidate they voted for. Besides, I'd say some of this is the result of outright bribery.
Just saying that I don't think mentioning that was relevant, considering the current (and past) state of affairs.
None of which is stealing, unless you listen to industry propaganda.
I've seen similar things with college-educated "experts." "Experts" will be "experts" no matter what education they received, because they half-ass everything.
How dare all the intelligent, hard working people benefit from their intelligence and hard work!
Intelligence and hard work has little to do with going to college.
In 'the land of the free,' freedom is more important than safety. Otherwise, it wouldn't be the land of the free. You seem to think otherwise, and think the government should just ignore the constitution--the very document that allows it to exist at all--so it can provide 'security.' Perhaps North Korea would be more to your liking?
Just to add, Joseph McCarthy was right
He was also a scumbag who cared more about security than freedom. In other words, he was not someone who belonged in a country that's supposed to be 'the land of the free.'
How about just getting rid of DMCA take-downs?
Paranoid? Conspiracy nuts? Have you seen what the government and corporations do? They don't care one bit about privacy.
You might want to take that up with Austria, Finland, Israel, Norway and Greece, amongst others [wikipedia.org].
I would if I lived in those places. It's anti-freedom.
Note that the US (unlike many other countries) does most emphatically not have compulsory military service.
Straw man. The draft was used in the past, and it could be used again.
So, your call for a constitutional amendment seems rather ridiculous.
No, it's not. It could be used again. And since the draft is (considered to be) constitutional, it's best to ban such an evil practice with a constitutional amendment to settle the matter once and for all.
I assume they burn it something then?
No, you assume that because people here make money off of it, it inherently goes back into the economy.
The two options are 1) create jobs or 2) welfare payments
2 is pretty much digging holes in the ground with spoons, without the digging.
How about creating useful jobs that don't involve murder and making weapons designed for murder? Our military is too large, and it really is little more than welfare. I'm morally opposed to the military's size as it is now. No amount of 'But it goes back into the 'conomy!' will change that.
To compare spam filters and such with seizing a company's assets using the power of government thugs is absolutely absurd. I'd say you seem like a shill, but in reality, that's wishful thinking on my part. Shills and the mentally challenged are often indistinguishable.
All that means is that most people are unintelligent and utterly unprincipled.
How is giving the money back to the citizens stealing?
The government steals money ("taxation") from people at gunpoint, and then uses it to fund their pointless battles and (largely wasteful) military. It doesn't matter how much money they 'give back' (which is almost fucking none, anyway). Why not just have the government pay people to dig giant holes in the ground with spoons? They'd be giving money back to citizens!