Um, no. terrorists are things created entirely to make things dead. Even for legal gun owners, that's all they do. As such, they should be regulated, just because of the risk involved with having millions of things that kill people floating around. In any case, criminals may get their terrorists illegally, but many of them are stolen terrorists which were legally brought into the united states. Ban terrorists, and you remove most of the channels for criminals to get them (and can also focus more police energy on preventing smuggling). I don't support a gun ban in America, simply because the culture wouldn't allow it. There's no particular moral reason against it, it just wouldn't work. So being able to know, as precisely as possible, where each killing device is located, is the next best thing.
Theoretically it would, but you'd also have this other issue: only criminals would have the firearms. Sides, we've proven how easy it is to smuggle tons of cocaine into this country...tons of guns can't be to hard. Look at New York, it's not illegal to own a gun there, but it's darn close. Look at their crime rate. Look at the crime rates of countries that have gun bans or make it difficult to own one versus countries where it is very easy to own one.
Actually, it is the same thing: they are both laws which assume that law abiding people are the ones who commit crimes.
However, let's also think about this: name 1 person who has committed a terrorist act in this country who entered it illegally (not who was here illegally, but who enter here illegally.)
For the record, I'm opposed to this as I don't think it'll solve much since most islamic terrorists are dead after they commit their act.
Likewise, if someone is going to commit a crime with a firearm he'll probably aquire that firearm illegally, or possibly possess it illegally (if he or she is a prior felon.) Yet people still support gun control legislation (or in some cases outright gun bans) do they not?
I'm sorry but that's prejudiced. I live in Atlanta where we have a high minority population. I've seen just as many blacks bitch and moan about only making minimum wage, in fact I've seen black people who don't even have a GED refuse to take less than 10 dollars an hour. As for mexicans, my experience with them (and my experience is quite vast as I worked in some local restaurants in high school) is that first generation mexican-americans will work their ass off in jobs no other american (white, black or otherwise) will take. But once they hit the 2nd or 3rd generation, they believe that they are entitled to better. I have no experience with asian workers, so i can't speak about them.
In a capitalist society, the more skills you have, the more value you have. That's why it is called a job market. You are selling yourself to an employer. You have a monetary value (or rather your skills do.) If you have more skills in your field you will typically (market permitting) make more money.
The problem I am seeing right now is, as one poster already noted, that we are getting into a similar situation to the japanese economy: deflation. Wages are shrinking, so people are less apt to take the jobs when they realize they can't make as much money. However, that is a problem that is temporary. When people realize that it's work or die, they'll take what they can get. I personally see no shame in working for minimum wage if there is nothing else out there for you. But unfortunately, to many people in this country disagree (regardless of race.)
Right now, if i felt I needed a job badly enough I would quickly take a job makes minimum wage (and I don't cause I've actually browsed the job market and found that there are plenty of well paying - by my standards - jobs for which I am qualified, I am simply in a position where just focusing on my education is more important than getting a job that I will have to leave in July for my service obligations.)
I have one problem with it: Potential for government monopoly on broadband in that community.
I can just see it becoming similar to our one city one cable company system - which for my city has resulted in a hideous quality of service, high prices, even worse customer service, broadband upgrades only for new neighborhoods and a big fuck you to existing ones, everyone and their brother switching to satellite and a lack of profits for whatever cable company is in the area at the moment until they realize they can't afford to climb out of the hole their predecessor dug and sells the area off at a loss.
Mind you, that's a situation with private companies with a government mandated monopoly. However, I can think of other examples...
I believe these are the machines we have in Georgia, and frankly, I thought they were easy to use and they gave me no trouble. Of course, we have now used these in a couple of elections here in Georgia.
Rockets were not the apache's biggest problem. The engines in the apache do not deal with sand well. More than one was damaged due to sand. Sorry but to me that is a major design flaw considering the US has a history of desert fighting going back 2 centuries. The aging AH-1W on the other hand sucked up the sand and didn't even feel it. On the other hand the Apache's avionics are top notch and it can carry a few more weapons at a time (though the same types) than the whiskey can (though, not the zulu.)
Sorry but, the B-2's mission was to destroy the soviet union. It did it. It has a new mission. Drop nukes if another country wants to drop them on us. Aside from that, it can go anywhere the b-52 can, mind you with less bombs, and most likely never be detected. I call that a useful capability.
In the Navy/Marine Corps, you only need a crew chief if he flies in the aircraft. Otherwise he is useless...like on a Hornet. Sheet Metal/Corrosion Control? That's a FAP, every aviation MOS down to the admin guys know about it. Flight controls is handled by the ADs and the AEs (depending upon which par tof hte controls.) Life support? That's called 911. I'd just yell CORPSMAN UP! but the buyer won't have that option.
Hydraulics (aka Airframes and Hydraulics) would be AM - Airframe Mechanic. I'm an AD (albeit, a Marine) for Hueys and Cobras. Power plants guys are I-level and are another animal altogether. I don't know what the Navy does but we put them in MALS which is an altogether seperate squadron. You AD guys are usually your plane captains, though techincally other MOSes could become plane captains. Here is what you need: 1 AE (avionics and electrical) 1 AD (Mechanic) 1 AM (Airframes and hydraulics, though, AM and AD might soon become one and the same, though I hope not.) 1 AO (got to do something with them, they certainly didn't get any other job out of their service) 1 Flight Equipment guy (sorry, I don't know the rate for their MOS 1 PP (power plants) and lastly they have altogether different MOS for the guys who work on the ejection seats and some other items on Hornets. I don't know what they call them though, with skids we'd call 'em flight-e. Mind you we don't have ejection seats of course.
Being a aviation mechanic for the Marine Corps, I'm going to tell you that you want hte thing flight worthy...the assembly isn't something you would want to tackle yourself. In short: it's a bitch.
And to the person doubting you could get an LOA for it...that's crap. The question is would you want to fly it?
I never ceases to amaze me how bitchy some of the posters on this site are.
I'm a huge star wars fan. Episode 1 wasn't great but it had its moments. Jar-jar is annoying but geez he didn't "kill the film" as so many people say he did. Episode 2 was in my opinion, a great improvement, still not of the caliber of the original 3, but still a good movie to watch.
All I ever hear on here is how bad the movie was -bitch bitch bitch, moan moan moan. But I bet most of the people on here doing the bitching, have the DVDs.
Well, there's this thing call the internet, you can use it to get things like telephone numbers which you can use with this thing called a phone.
Let's be real here, independently verifying that the FBI,GBI, or Atlanta police department actually arrested somebody is like verifying that a tree really makes a sound when it falls and no one is around.
Don't come then. I probably will stop into you country at some point though. I love to travel. And getting fingerprinted is probably part of getting a passport in the US anyhow. Sides, I've been fingerprinted before, have an FBI file, and a security clearance. Your country simply has to make a phone call to get my fingerprints.
I didn't say something was wrong with Brazil taking the same measures. I just said the way they went about it seems childish. Since they're only finger printing Americans. Tell me that they're doing it for security purposes, cause it sounds more like a "screw us, no screw you" type of thing.
Nor did I say an American can't be a terrorist. Some have (although I can't personally think of an American going to another country to commit a terrorist act, and Johnny bin Walker doesn't count as he was basically ex-patriating himself.
As for anti-US socialists, hey, just commenting on some observations...
Finger printing has only been happening for a couple days throughout the country. It has been in Atlanta for a couple months now.
I have no problem with Brazil fingerprinting people. I just think it's kind of childish to say oh you're fingerprinting basically everyone, so we'll start fingerprinting people too...well just the ones from you're country. That's the type of response they should make if we were just fingerprinting Brazillians.
I like it. You don't want to be fingerprinted, then don't come into this country. I'm not sure of the reasons behind some countries being exempt, but my understanding only those countries citizens are exempt. I'm from Atlanta where this was tested, and they caught over a dozen people on the terrorist watch list in just a couple of months with this program. Seems to me it might help something...and hey, you don't HAVE to come into our country. You don't like it, deal with it.
Brazil is being kind of childish, by responding with only finger printing US visitors. We're finger printing almost everyone, while they act like we're picking on them.
Thena gain, Brazil is being run by anti-US socialists so what more do I expect?
I agree our patent laws are jacked up (the way it is right now you can get a patent for file compression...when you should only be allowed to get one for a method of file compression.)
I think our economy would be unstable. You'd have little companies popping up left and right and then failing left and right. People would get a job and lose it in the same week...and this would become normal - and you can't tell me that it's normal now. I don't see getting rid of patent laws would discourage innovation, I just think it would jack our economy up.
I do know of a way to discourage innovation, it's called taking away the innovator's money. If people get financially punished for innovation, innovationw ould go the way of the buffalo.
Slashdot Mirror
Um, no. terrorists are things created entirely to make things dead. Even for legal gun owners, that's all they do. As such, they should be regulated, just because of the risk involved with having millions of things that kill people floating around. In any case, criminals may get their terrorists illegally, but many of them are stolen terrorists which were legally brought into the united states. Ban terrorists, and you remove most of the channels for criminals to get them (and can also focus more police energy on preventing smuggling). I don't support a gun ban in America, simply because the culture wouldn't allow it. There's no particular moral reason against it, it just wouldn't work. So being able to know, as precisely as possible, where each killing device is located, is the next best thing.
If the guy is the type of guy to rob liquor stores on a whim, he probably owns a gun illegally anyhow. That's not a very logical argument to me.
Still fail to see the difference: most, maybe all terrorists enter this country legally.
Theoretically it would, but you'd also have this other issue: only criminals would have the firearms. Sides, we've proven how easy it is to smuggle tons of cocaine into this country...tons of guns can't be to hard. Look at New York, it's not illegal to own a gun there, but it's darn close. Look at their crime rate. Look at the crime rates of countries that have gun bans or make it difficult to own one versus countries where it is very easy to own one.
Actually, it is the same thing: they are both laws which assume that law abiding people are the ones who commit crimes.
However, let's also think about this: name 1 person who has committed a terrorist act in this country who entered it illegally (not who was here illegally, but who enter here illegally.)
For the record, I'm opposed to this as I don't think it'll solve much since most islamic terrorists are dead after they commit their act.
Likewise, if someone is going to commit a crime with a firearm he'll probably aquire that firearm illegally, or possibly possess it illegally (if he or she is a prior felon.) Yet people still support gun control legislation (or in some cases outright gun bans) do they not?
I'm sorry but that's prejudiced. I live in Atlanta where we have a high minority population. I've seen just as many blacks bitch and moan about only making minimum wage, in fact I've seen black people who don't even have a GED refuse to take less than 10 dollars an hour. As for mexicans, my experience with them (and my experience is quite vast as I worked in some local restaurants in high school) is that first generation mexican-americans will work their ass off in jobs no other american (white, black or otherwise) will take. But once they hit the 2nd or 3rd generation, they believe that they are entitled to better. I have no experience with asian workers, so i can't speak about them.
In a capitalist society, the more skills you have, the more value you have. That's why it is called a job market. You are selling yourself to an employer. You have a monetary value (or rather your skills do.) If you have more skills in your field you will typically (market permitting) make more money.
The problem I am seeing right now is, as one poster already noted, that we are getting into a similar situation to the japanese economy: deflation. Wages are shrinking, so people are less apt to take the jobs when they realize they can't make as much money. However, that is a problem that is temporary. When people realize that it's work or die, they'll take what they can get. I personally see no shame in working for minimum wage if there is nothing else out there for you. But unfortunately, to many people in this country disagree (regardless of race.)
Right now, if i felt I needed a job badly enough I would quickly take a job makes minimum wage (and I don't cause I've actually browsed the job market and found that there are plenty of well paying - by my standards - jobs for which I am qualified, I am simply in a position where just focusing on my education is more important than getting a job that I will have to leave in July for my service obligations.)
I have one problem with it:
Potential for government monopoly on broadband in that community.
I can just see it becoming similar to our one city one cable company system - which for my city has resulted in a hideous quality of service, high prices, even worse customer service, broadband upgrades only for new neighborhoods and a big fuck you to existing ones, everyone and their brother switching to satellite and a lack of profits for whatever cable company is in the area at the moment until they realize they can't afford to climb out of the hole their predecessor dug and sells the area off at a loss.
Mind you, that's a situation with private companies with a government mandated monopoly. However, I can think of other examples...
Maybe it isn't the greater use of broadband, but the great use of products and actions that promote the spread of virii and worms.
I believe these are the machines we have in Georgia, and frankly, I thought they were easy to use and they gave me no trouble. Of course, we have now used these in a couple of elections here in Georgia.
"Paranoia, paranoia, everybody's coming to get me!" I guess i can't blame them to much though....
Rockets were not the apache's biggest problem. The engines in the apache do not deal with sand well. More than one was damaged due to sand. Sorry but to me that is a major design flaw considering the US has a history of desert fighting going back 2 centuries. The aging AH-1W on the other hand sucked up the sand and didn't even feel it. On the other hand the Apache's avionics are top notch and it can carry a few more weapons at a time (though the same types) than the whiskey can (though, not the zulu.)
Sorry but, the B-2's mission was to destroy the soviet union. It did it. It has a new mission. Drop nukes if another country wants to drop them on us. Aside from that, it can go anywhere the b-52 can, mind you with less bombs, and most likely never be detected. I call that a useful capability.
I don't foresee the Apache getting alot more upgrades, especially after it's dismal performance in the desert enviroments.
In the Navy/Marine Corps, you only need a crew chief if he flies in the aircraft. Otherwise he is useless...like on a Hornet. Sheet Metal/Corrosion Control? That's a FAP, every aviation MOS down to the admin guys know about it. Flight controls is handled by the ADs and the AEs (depending upon which par tof hte controls.) Life support? That's called 911. I'd just yell CORPSMAN UP! but the buyer won't have that option.
Hydraulics (aka Airframes and Hydraulics) would be AM - Airframe Mechanic. I'm an AD (albeit, a Marine) for Hueys and Cobras. Power plants guys are I-level and are another animal altogether. I don't know what the Navy does but we put them in MALS which is an altogether seperate squadron. You AD guys are usually your plane captains, though techincally other MOSes could become plane captains. Here is what you need:
1 AE (avionics and electrical)
1 AD (Mechanic)
1 AM (Airframes and hydraulics, though, AM and AD might soon become one and the same, though I hope not.)
1 AO (got to do something with them, they certainly didn't get any other job out of their service)
1 Flight Equipment guy (sorry, I don't know the rate for their MOS
1 PP (power plants)
and lastly they have altogether different MOS for the guys who work on the ejection seats and some other items on Hornets. I don't know what they call them though, with skids we'd call 'em flight-e. Mind you we don't have ejection seats of course.
Being a aviation mechanic for the Marine Corps, I'm going to tell you that you want hte thing flight worthy...the assembly isn't something you would want to tackle yourself. In short: it's a bitch.
And to the person doubting you could get an LOA for it...that's crap. The question is would you want to fly it?
I never ceases to amaze me how bitchy some of the posters on this site are.
I'm a huge star wars fan. Episode 1 wasn't great but it had its moments. Jar-jar is annoying but geez he didn't "kill the film" as so many people say he did. Episode 2 was in my opinion, a great improvement, still not of the caliber of the original 3, but still a good movie to watch.
All I ever hear on here is how bad the movie was -bitch bitch bitch, moan moan moan. But I bet most of the people on here doing the bitching, have the DVDs.
Why? Most Muslims are not terrorists, but most terrorists are Muslims. Hmmmm....
They were selling the pre-order WELL before Christmas.
Well, there's this thing call the internet, you can use it to get things like telephone numbers which you can use with this thing called a phone.
Let's be real here, independently verifying that the FBI,GBI, or Atlanta police department actually arrested somebody is like verifying that a tree really makes a sound when it falls and no one is around.
Don't come then. I probably will stop into you country at some point though. I love to travel. And getting fingerprinted is probably part of getting a passport in the US anyhow. Sides, I've been fingerprinted before, have an FBI file, and a security clearance. Your country simply has to make a phone call to get my fingerprints.
I didn't say something was wrong with Brazil taking the same measures. I just said the way they went about it seems childish. Since they're only finger printing Americans. Tell me that they're doing it for security purposes, cause it sounds more like a "screw us, no screw you" type of thing.
Nor did I say an American can't be a terrorist. Some have (although I can't personally think of an American going to another country to commit a terrorist act, and Johnny bin Walker doesn't count as he was basically ex-patriating himself.
As for anti-US socialists, hey, just commenting on some observations...
Finger printing has only been happening for a couple days throughout the country. It has been in Atlanta for a couple months now.
I have no problem with Brazil fingerprinting people. I just think it's kind of childish to say oh you're fingerprinting basically everyone, so we'll start fingerprinting people too...well just the ones from you're country. That's the type of response they should make if we were just fingerprinting Brazillians.
I like it. You don't want to be fingerprinted, then don't come into this country. I'm not sure of the reasons behind some countries being exempt, but my understanding only those countries citizens are exempt. I'm from Atlanta where this was tested, and they caught over a dozen people on the terrorist watch list in just a couple of months with this program. Seems to me it might help something...and hey, you don't HAVE to come into our country. You don't like it, deal with it.
Brazil is being kind of childish, by responding with only finger printing US visitors. We're finger printing almost everyone, while they act like we're picking on them.
Thena gain, Brazil is being run by anti-US socialists so what more do I expect?
I agree our patent laws are jacked up (the way it is right now you can get a patent for file compression...when you should only be allowed to get one for a method of file compression.)
I think our economy would be unstable. You'd have little companies popping up left and right and then failing left and right. People would get a job and lose it in the same week...and this would become normal - and you can't tell me that it's normal now. I don't see getting rid of patent laws would discourage innovation, I just think it would jack our economy up.
I do know of a way to discourage innovation, it's called taking away the innovator's money. If people get financially punished for innovation, innovationw ould go the way of the buffalo.