Not to detract from the Nerf engineers fine work, to my way of thinking a projectile designed to cause no damage whatsoever really can't be classified as a weapon, so I thought "effective" was a given.
But now I think about it, a Nerf tank may not be solid enough to make an armour piercing shell detonate, so the Army could be missing out on something there...
"...an intermittent malfunctioning network card which consequently overcame the built-in system redundancy"
But it's one of the lucky ones.
Every year, thousands of NICs fall victim to built-in system redundancy; if you know a card whose activity indicators are darkened and lifeless, it may have a redundancy problem. With your support and donations, we at Ethernetics Anonymous can help more network cards beat the scourge of built-in system redundancy, and make them feel like a useful part of society again.
I don't think it gives the trapper the legal (or ethical) right to kill the animals indiscriminately
The trapper is in fact a Ranger employed by the National Parks & Wildlife Service to kill feral cats in a protected area. So he certainly does have the legal right, and it's not indiscriminate.
Any municipality will have clear laws about handling stray animals, and they most likely give at least some protection to the rights of the pet-owners in such cases.
Federal officer on Crown land: municipal laws don't apply, and the federal law says that an animal posing a threat to native fauna can be trapped or eliminated at the officer's discretion. A pet owner surrenders any rights by failing in their responsibility to control their animal as proscribed by law.
Since these cats are presumably not causing serious danger to life or property...
Wrong. What do cats, being nocturnal predators, do when they're out at night? THEY HUNT! And domestic cats still hunt for sport regardless of how well they're fed. A handful of loose cats can cause disproportionately large amounts of damage to bird, lizard and small mammal populations, which is precisely why there are Rangers out to eliminate them.
...anyone who thinks that the mere presence of another person's wayward pet entitles him to kill it, claim its carcass as his own property, and sell the fur for a profit is a thief in my view
The fact that a Ranger isn't just "anyone" aside, in my view anyone who allows their pet to wander into a protected area is not just criminally negligent towards the welfare of their own animal, but a wanton environmental vandal who should be prosecuted to the full extent of law. A dead cat is getting off lightly under the circumstances.
...and is almost certainly breaking local laws as well.
Wrong again. The only law being broken is by the cat owners who let their pets out where they shouldn't be. In that regard it's like parking in front of a fire hydrant: if your property gets damaged (windows broken and rolled into a ditch) because you left it somewhere it shouldn't have been, nobody is liable but you.
FWIW I like cats, but away from homes they're an introduced pest wreaking havoc among species that have no natural defences against a predator that size. In that kind of environment pet owners have as much responsibility to their surroundings as their pets.
I see I have to explain what everyone else found funny:
Growing foodstuffs on other planets is exciting.
Asparagus is not exciting, and possibly the worst thing you could talk about if you want to get people (particularly kids) interested in space science.
Thanks for playing "Miss The Nuance", the game where winners are losers in so many ways.
Better yet: a 30 foot tall armour plated robot penguin that launches high explosive packed herrings while shrieking "DON'T FEAR ME!!!!" through a 10,000 watt speaker system, programmed to seek and destroy.
In that case, you mean "Thought the description could have been Americanised". God Save the [$monarch] is England's national anthem, the article comes from the British Broadcasting Corporation, the people who built the computer and wrote the program were English. Not referring to the American re-write seems pretty reasonable and accurate to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Sounds good, but how do we get all convicted spammers sent to a prison staffed with blind guards next door to a rifle range?
Not to detract from the Nerf engineers fine work, to my way of thinking a projectile designed to cause no damage whatsoever really can't be classified as a weapon, so I thought "effective" was a given.
But now I think about it, a Nerf tank may not be solid enough to make an armour piercing shell detonate, so the Army could be missing out on something there...
Seems appropriate: safe non-lethal weapons are pretty much science fiction.
I don't want to sound greedy, but we're trying to make packets.
"...an intermittent malfunctioning network card which consequently overcame the built-in system redundancy"
But it's one of the lucky ones.
Every year, thousands of NICs fall victim to built-in system redundancy; if you know a card whose activity indicators are darkened and lifeless, it may have a redundancy problem. With your support and donations, we at Ethernetics Anonymous can help more network cards beat the scourge of built-in system redundancy, and make them feel like a useful part of society again.
I think there are factions on Congress having issues with the Uranus Rocket.
Calling it that, maybe; riding it, apparently not.
You should have RTFA.
...anyone who thinks that the mere presence of another person's wayward pet entitles him to kill it, claim its carcass as his own property, and sell the fur for a profit is a thief in my view
...and is almost certainly breaking local laws as well.
I don't think it gives the trapper the legal (or ethical) right to kill the animals indiscriminately
The trapper is in fact a Ranger employed by the National Parks & Wildlife Service to kill feral cats in a protected area. So he certainly does have the legal right, and it's not indiscriminate.
Any municipality will have clear laws about handling stray animals, and they most likely give at least some protection to the rights of the pet-owners in such cases.
Federal officer on Crown land: municipal laws don't apply, and the federal law says that an animal posing a threat to native fauna can be trapped or eliminated at the officer's discretion. A pet owner surrenders any rights by failing in their responsibility to control their animal as proscribed by law.
Since these cats are presumably not causing serious danger to life or property...
Wrong. What do cats, being nocturnal predators, do when they're out at night? THEY HUNT! And domestic cats still hunt for sport regardless of how well they're fed. A handful of loose cats can cause disproportionately large amounts of damage to bird, lizard and small mammal populations, which is precisely why there are Rangers out to eliminate them.
The fact that a Ranger isn't just "anyone" aside, in my view anyone who allows their pet to wander into a protected area is not just criminally negligent towards the welfare of their own animal, but a wanton environmental vandal who should be prosecuted to the full extent of law. A dead cat is getting off lightly under the circumstances.
Wrong again. The only law being broken is by the cat owners who let their pets out where they shouldn't be. In that regard it's like parking in front of a fire hydrant: if your property gets damaged (windows broken and rolled into a ditch) because you left it somewhere it shouldn't have been, nobody is liable but you.
FWIW I like cats, but away from homes they're an introduced pest wreaking havoc among species that have no natural defences against a predator that size. In that kind of environment pet owners have as much responsibility to their surroundings as their pets.
the only thing that went through my head was memories of Matt Le Blanc
Oh, a noob!
hire mexicans to push our cars. They have to be cheaper than gas.
But they don't burn as cleanly.
Why this modern obsession with "closure"? It's almost as if
I've only leafed through the brochures myself, but the wild life tour sounds good.
I see I have to explain what everyone else found funny:
Growing foodstuffs on other planets is exciting.
Asparagus is not exciting, and possibly the worst thing you could talk about if you want to get people (particularly kids) interested in space science.
Thanks for playing "Miss The Nuance", the game where winners are losers in so many ways.
...from an early beta.
Better yet: a 30 foot tall armour plated robot penguin that launches high explosive packed herrings while shrieking "DON'T FEAR ME!!!!" through a 10,000 watt speaker system, programmed to seek and destroy.
Seems fair...
Odd, looking at the brown Zune I could have sworn it was a number two.
What will we do when kids learn there's no ice at the pole for the old elf to live in?
Saint Nicholas definitely isn't an elf. He's too tall to be the traditional type, and too fat to be the Tolkein/RPG variety.
But to answer the question, he'll either have to adapt (/me sings "Wading Through a Winter Wonderland" and "Frosty the Puddle") or move to Neptune.
And thankfully not in this colour.
I bet they don't read Slashdot though.
Of course not. Slashdot is more interesting than asparagus, though sometimes not as intelligent.
You might be able to grow asparagus in it really well. ... It is very exciting for us.
And I thought I didn't get out much.
Might get the cheaters through a class but it's hard to hide a lack of training in the real world.
That's what managerial positions are for.
I really didn't need to know about his particular fetish.
And you're sharing this with us because heebie-jeebies shared is heebie-jeebies halved?
Which do you mean, the clothes or the IT grads?
Wait...you can wash clothes?
Except one's breath.
Hey, as long as you were getting philosphical...
In that case, you mean "Thought the description could have been Americanised". God Save the [$monarch] is England's national anthem, the article comes from the British Broadcasting Corporation, the people who built the computer and wrote the program were English. Not referring to the American re-write seems pretty reasonable and accurate to me.