What you're saying is a lot like the DoD's policy for service members, but that's not how it works in most states for civilians. Threat to safety or property is an affirmative defense, so long as the degree of violence used is comparable or proportionate to the threat faced. There *is* a duty to retreat in most states, but that doesn't apply when retreating would not change, or would increase, the risk of harm. If, for example, someone threatens you with physical violence unless you leave, the correct action would be to leave and then address the situation through the proper channels. By refusing to retreat, you are escalating the situation.
Yes.. moral and ethical issues aside, the problem with inbreeding is that any recessive defective traits will be more likely to be expressed in the subsequent generation. However, inbreeding (as animals often do) can be non-detrimental, and indeed beneficial, to a population provided that the genes are "clean." All modern dog breeds, for example, are products of inbreeding, which is why some breeds are significantly more likely to exhibit illnesses such as hip dysplasia.
The practical issues are that A) we don't have a complete map of heritable diseases, and B) exposure to cosmic radiation is likely to introduce a few flaws along the way.
And answered in a hurry. Newsgroups are hit-and-miss, and there's not much way to provide incentive for a response. Google answers was a good concept, but probably cost more to manage and operate than it made.
This isn't actually anything new, despite the implications/ignorance of the author. Hasbro and Mattel have been shutting down Scrabble knock-offs for years (last paragraph), and for some reason continues to leave a void in what would likely be a very profitable online presence. e-scrabble.com was one of my favorites; unfortunately the site owner chose to use the word "Scrabble" specifically. Since trademarks expire only when the owners fail to defend them, that was a bit like putting a large bullseye on his head.
And what makes you think the RIAA won't simply be replaced by another organization representing all the self-publishers, if/when self-publishing becomes the norm? In fact, I'd be more surprised if it didn't happen.
Wouldn't take much to OCR it into a different format, but that doesn't make extensive screen-reading any more palatable in my book. (Sorry, sorry).
I thought the book was ok, for what it was. Unfortunately I didn't know what it was when I bought it, and deist mythology is best left in the past, in my opinion. What makes mythology interesting is not just the stories themselves, but their context. A modern novel is hardly the same as the basis of an entire civilization and as such doesn't hold nearly the same sway. Dianetics notwithstanding. Praise be to Xenu.
Not that I think he should be tried as an adult. I don't think any charges should be reduced, but the fact is, teenagers have horrible judgment. Not all to the same extent, granted, but nonetheless, there's a reason they have reduced rights, which is the same reason it's unethical to try them as adults. They either have the responsibility of an adult.. or they don't. The state tries to get it both ways, which is a crock of shit in my book. Give the kid a taste of what awaits him if he continues down the same road, and either he changes, or he'll be back behind bars soon enough. Vengeance feels good, but it's rarely productive.
Thank God we have embedded YouTube videos on Slashdot now. Now if only we could get people to post a bunch of asinine and off-topic comments below each video...
Here's the evidence in favor of conviction, as I see it:
* There was a short call from Paul's phone to Nina's, not answered. The sort of thing you might do if you were trying to find a cell phone without searching. * Nina's phone was subsequently found in her car with the battery removed, which would also coincidentally prevent tracking (even though turning it off would do the same). * Hans' phone was also found with the battery removed. * She "left" without her kids, and in fact left them in the custody of someone she claimed to be an unfit parent. * She bought groceries immediately before dropping off the kids. They were found rotting in her car. * Sleeping bag cover with her blood on it, in his car, in conjunction with:
- Testimony from the son that he saw dad carrying something in a bag (possibly a sleeping bag) * Nina was scheduled to start a new job. She never showed up, never called to explain. * The defense actually suggested that she didn't show up because there would be a background check and fingerprinting, however:
- She already had a background check when she got her citizenship shortly before this
- Her fingerprints aren't on record anywhere as she had never been arrested and had no criminal history * She left thousands in her bank account when she supposedly fled the country. * None of her bank cards have been used since the date she was last seen. * Hans bought books about murder after she went missing. * He "doesn't remember" where he left the car seat. * He went on a trip up into the mountains shortly after her death.
As for the boy's testimony, it's been about as reliable as you might expect a child's to be; self contradictory and clearly influenced by the grandparents.
If you refuse to vote for conviction based on your belief, your perjury will be obvious and it will almost certainly cause a mistrial.
Who said anything about perjury? There's no law about changing your mind after becoming more intimately acquainted with the law, thanks to a highly informative lecture by the prosecution.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd settle for "social networking" sites to go the way of GeoCities.
There are web hosts in Kentucky?
The WHO also has bigger issues to worry about than the relatively minor health concerns of industrialized nations.
That said, http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1998/en/pr98-29.html
It's assault if you emit AIDS, so I'm guessing yes. Unless you meant betta radiation , in which case, shine on!
What you're saying is a lot like the DoD's policy for service members, but that's not how it works in most states for civilians. Threat to safety or property is an affirmative defense, so long as the degree of violence used is comparable or proportionate to the threat faced. There *is* a duty to retreat in most states, but that doesn't apply when retreating would not change, or would increase, the risk of harm. If, for example, someone threatens you with physical violence unless you leave, the correct action would be to leave and then address the situation through the proper channels. By refusing to retreat, you are escalating the situation.
Why wait?
"I'm not saying you have to move, but Robocop's timer is set to shoot water at the spot you're in, in 30 seconds.. Nothing I can do about it really."
Yes.. moral and ethical issues aside, the problem with inbreeding is that any recessive defective traits will be more likely to be expressed in the subsequent generation. However, inbreeding (as animals often do) can be non-detrimental, and indeed beneficial, to a population provided that the genes are "clean." All modern dog breeds, for example, are products of inbreeding, which is why some breeds are significantly more likely to exhibit illnesses such as hip dysplasia.
The practical issues are that A) we don't have a complete map of heritable diseases, and B) exposure to cosmic radiation is likely to introduce a few flaws along the way.
I can't say I've ever come across anything big enough that I can't drop it. On the contrary..
Pfft.. I've detected Hawking Radiation spewing from the sonic horizon of my Bose Wave Radio for years!
And answered in a hurry. Newsgroups are hit-and-miss, and there's not much way to provide incentive for a response. Google answers was a good concept, but probably cost more to manage and operate than it made.
Now there's something you wouldn't want to yell on a crowded street.
This isn't actually anything new, despite the implications/ignorance of the author. Hasbro and Mattel have been shutting down Scrabble knock-offs for years (last paragraph), and for some reason continues to leave a void in what would likely be a very profitable online presence. e-scrabble.com was one of my favorites; unfortunately the site owner chose to use the word "Scrabble" specifically. Since trademarks expire only when the owners fail to defend them, that was a bit like putting a large bullseye on his head.
And what makes you think the RIAA won't simply be replaced by another organization representing all the self-publishers, if/when self-publishing becomes the norm? In fact, I'd be more surprised if it didn't happen.
Or mulatto.
Wouldn't take much to OCR it into a different format, but that doesn't make extensive screen-reading any more palatable in my book. (Sorry, sorry).
I thought the book was ok, for what it was. Unfortunately I didn't know what it was when I bought it, and deist mythology is best left in the past, in my opinion. What makes mythology interesting is not just the stories themselves, but their context. A modern novel is hardly the same as the basis of an entire civilization and as such doesn't hold nearly the same sway. Dianetics notwithstanding. Praise be to Xenu.
The squid certainly accomplishes its mission, but there's just something disorderly about a bunch of bricks hanging from tentacles that puts me off.
Uh, prison comes to mind.
Not that I think he should be tried as an adult. I don't think any charges should be reduced, but the fact is, teenagers have horrible judgment. Not all to the same extent, granted, but nonetheless, there's a reason they have reduced rights, which is the same reason it's unethical to try them as adults. They either have the responsibility of an adult.. or they don't. The state tries to get it both ways, which is a crock of shit in my book. Give the kid a taste of what awaits him if he continues down the same road, and either he changes, or he'll be back behind bars soon enough. Vengeance feels good, but it's rarely productive.
Great, but what happens when we use up all the waves?!? This is an environmental catastrophe waiting to happen.
Thank God we have embedded YouTube videos on Slashdot now. Now if only we could get people to post a bunch of asinine and off-topic comments below each video...
Here's the evidence in favor of conviction, as I see it:
* There was a short call from Paul's phone to Nina's, not answered. The sort of thing you might do if you were trying to find a cell phone without searching.
* Nina's phone was subsequently found in her car with the battery removed, which would also coincidentally prevent tracking (even though turning it off would do the same).
* Hans' phone was also found with the battery removed.
* She "left" without her kids, and in fact left them in the custody of someone she claimed to be an unfit parent.
* She bought groceries immediately before dropping off the kids. They were found rotting in her car.
* Sleeping bag cover with her blood on it, in his car, in conjunction with:
- Testimony from the son that he saw dad carrying something in a bag (possibly a sleeping bag)
* Nina was scheduled to start a new job. She never showed up, never called to explain.
* The defense actually suggested that she didn't show up because there would be a background check and fingerprinting, however:
- She already had a background check when she got her citizenship shortly before this
- Her fingerprints aren't on record anywhere as she had never been arrested and had no criminal history
* She left thousands in her bank account when she supposedly fled the country.
* None of her bank cards have been used since the date she was last seen.
* Hans bought books about murder after she went missing.
* He "doesn't remember" where he left the car seat.
* He went on a trip up into the mountains shortly after her death.
As for the boy's testimony, it's been about as reliable as you might expect a child's to be; self contradictory and clearly influenced by the grandparents.
It wasn't a sleeping bag, it was a sleeping bag bag -- what you put the sleeping bag in when it doesn't have a body in it.
If you refuse to vote for conviction based on your belief, your perjury will be obvious and it will almost certainly cause a mistrial.
Who said anything about perjury? There's no law about changing your mind after becoming more intimately acquainted with the law, thanks to a highly informative lecture by the prosecution.
Viewed from another perspective, they were actually at a laundromat.
Except he didn't pick them up.. http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2007/12/witnesses-hans.html CTRL-F "Ellen Doren"
Which makes it all the more unusual.