And if enough people like you don't like conceal carry, keep voting it away. I wont move to your state. But next time to move to an area, check the crime rates of conceal carry states versus those who ban it. I think you'll find the statistics quite surprising.
I have; the only paper I can find that supports this claim is written by a dude named John Lott, who just happens to be a political hack. The paper is deeply flawed and has very little support, but apparently that's all the evidence someone like you (or my coworker, who is convinced that we live in one of the most violent crime-ridden times in history, DESPITE me showing him statistics otherwise) need to back up your preconceived notions.
Also, for the record, I don't care about guns. I don't think they're the root of the problem, and I also don't think they're a solution. I do find it retarded when someone suggests that the best way to prevent violent incidents is for *everybody* to have guns though.
I'm sorry you live in such shitholes that you've been broken into multiple times. I'd suggest that YOU do some research in crime rates before moving to a new area, though, because in the places I've lived, you DO NOT need a gun to survive.
If you can't afford to live in a safe area, though, then by all means keep your gun. Just don't call the rest of us nanny state wimps when we choose not to because we don't need it. And if you're around me, definitely keep that shit to yourself, because I stick to safe places, and your concealed carry trigger happy ass makes anywhere I'm at LESS safe.
How about, instead of us moving, you go to Afghanistan and Iraq and fight these "wars" that you so strongly believe in? Not only that, you pay the taxes to support the war effort.
No, the wealthy are paying for the bulk of government operations because you don't want to.
Give me $1,000,000 per year and I will *happily* pay 50% of it in taxes. At my current meager salary, I can't *afford* to pay 50% of it in taxes and remain a functional member of society.
Umm, no? Having the raw HTML source open in one monitor with your browser(s) opened to view it on the other monitor to quickly make a change, save, and refresh in the browser(s) is incredibly useful.
Nice unbiased sources you have there. It's a good thing they're there as bastions of 100% honesty, to comment on the huge left-wing conspiracy known as the news media.
In short: if you're going to complain about one source being biased, then use an equally biased source as some sort of "retort," you don't deserve some sort of pat on the back for somehow escaping the sway of the original biased source. In fact, you deserve a "fuck off, partisan hack."
Yeah, Don, it's a total piece of garbage. It's only been up 67 days without a reboot
Seriously, who gives a shit what your uptime is? My Windows boxes tend to go for weeks between reboots, with frequent hibernation periods, only shutting down when there are critical updates. They happen when I'm not even using the computer, and when it starts back up it restarts most applications, so why would I even care if it happened every week or even every night?
If your best rebuttal to someone giving you shit about overpaying for a Mac is that it has 67 days of uptime, I'd suggest that maybe you should look for a better "killer feature" to brag about.
That website, along with those it links to, are filled with some of the most egregious weasel speak I've seen since I started reading up on SEO. This dude is a professional patent troll.
Can someone go after the ad network that shows the blatantly false "I made $77 an hour doing nothing!" and "Get an iPad for $44!"? These things show up all over the place -- CNN, NBA/NFL, Facebook -- and they are clearly scams, yet nobody seems to notice or do anything about them.
Ah, well, Square Enix doesn't know there is a Europe, so you're probably out of luck there. That and apparently a Chrono Trigger remake means "up the Akira Toriyama to 11" to them.
Oh the irony. Don't you know that one of the biggest selling points for Chrono Trigger was the fact that it was a "dream team" of Squaresoft and Toriyama? The only reason there weren't cutscenes in the original is that it was beyond the ability of the technology of the time.
Hypocrisy - look it up. I don't care one whit if Gingrich fucks a busload of nuns during his spare time. I *do* care when he (and his party) make "morality" part of the platform, and then turns around and violates said morals. Why the fuck should I vote for someone who violates one of his main promises?
Your failure to understand seems to stem from the fact that you (and other slow thinkers like you) think adultery is automatically bad, and that we wouldn't vote for someone based on who they do and/or don't put their dick in.
Just like when Obama said "I'm going to close Gitmo" and "I'm going to investigate AT&T over the warrantless wiretaps" and then didn't do either of those things. That loses him points. It would then be sheer hypocrisy if he were to open more detention facilities, or ask for more wiretaps. But if he decides he wants to screw Hillary Clinton on the side? I don't care -- he never told me he wouldn't, and it's not something I'd base a vote on anyway.
Do you get it? It's not the extra marital affairs we care about. It's the hypocrisy.
Here's the difference. I'll go slowly and use small words so you might understand.
Clinton never ran on a platform of "family values" in the party of "family values" and "sanctity of marriage."
Do you get it now? Similarly, Clinton is the guy that said "I never inhaled," and we didn't hold it against him because he didn't run on an anti-drug platform. Clinton could have also been banging Al Gore, and we wouldn't have held it against either of them because neither one ran on a platform of "no homos!"
But really, what are the real stats for it happening?
Why does that statistic even matter? If it happens even once, it's too often. If it happens due to Sony's negligence, it's too often.
I suppose you're the kind of person who thinks, "well, only like 100 people were actually harmed by the data breach, so really it's not that bad. Sucks to be one of those 100 people." Or "Only 1% of executions are committed against innocent people, so really it's not that bad. Sucks to be one of those 1%."
We all live in society and have to conform to some extent - if you don't want to conform at all then go live in a shack in the woods and shout at the bears. Society is what makes mankind strong - if everyone was a solitary individualist we'd have gone extinct a million years ago.
Spoken like a true collectivist. You sure you're not on the Socialism Weekly mailing list?
That's the real problem that I see, but apparently the apologists do not.
You must not be a programmer.
I've written a lot of code that I'm perfectly confident in using, that I know works, that I've sold to clients, that I would never want another programmer to see. Stuff that I would like to reorganize and clean up, but haven't done yet given time and money constraints. Things where I know the code would be easier to read and maintain if I refactored my class structures, or used a different/newer API, or used a new trick/feature of the language that I didn't know when I started the project. However, none of those deficiencies imply anything about the code's functionality.
Slashdot Mirror
I have; the only paper I can find that supports this claim is written by a dude named John Lott, who just happens to be a political hack. The paper is deeply flawed and has very little support, but apparently that's all the evidence someone like you (or my coworker, who is convinced that we live in one of the most violent crime-ridden times in history, DESPITE me showing him statistics otherwise) need to back up your preconceived notions.
Also, for the record, I don't care about guns. I don't think they're the root of the problem, and I also don't think they're a solution. I do find it retarded when someone suggests that the best way to prevent violent incidents is for *everybody* to have guns though.
I'm sorry you live in such shitholes that you've been broken into multiple times. I'd suggest that YOU do some research in crime rates before moving to a new area, though, because in the places I've lived, you DO NOT need a gun to survive.
If you can't afford to live in a safe area, though, then by all means keep your gun. Just don't call the rest of us nanny state wimps when we choose not to because we don't need it. And if you're around me, definitely keep that shit to yourself, because I stick to safe places, and your concealed carry trigger happy ass makes anywhere I'm at LESS safe.
--Jeremy
Yet you still blame Obama for its actions in the 1st month of his presidency.
--Jeremy
/golfclap
Nice non-rebuttal there. You're technically correct, which is the best kind of correct.
--Jeremy
Another Israel apologist, how charming.
How about, instead of us moving, you go to Afghanistan and Iraq and fight these "wars" that you so strongly believe in? Not only that, you pay the taxes to support the war effort.
--Jeremy
You do understand that the Broken Window Fallacy can be used to justify nearly *any* expense, right?
--Jeremy
Give me $1,000,000 per year and I will *happily* pay 50% of it in taxes. At my current meager salary, I can't *afford* to pay 50% of it in taxes and remain a functional member of society.
--Jeremy
[citation needed]
--Jeremy
That's all it takes for a STFU?
No, it's just you.
--Jeremy
Umm, no? Having the raw HTML source open in one monitor with your browser(s) opened to view it on the other monitor to quickly make a change, save, and refresh in the browser(s) is incredibly useful.
--Jeremy
Nice unbiased sources you have there. It's a good thing they're there as bastions of 100% honesty, to comment on the huge left-wing conspiracy known as the news media.
In short: if you're going to complain about one source being biased, then use an equally biased source as some sort of "retort," you don't deserve some sort of pat on the back for somehow escaping the sway of the original biased source. In fact, you deserve a "fuck off, partisan hack."
--Jeremy
Congratulations! That may be the best example of proving your debate opponent's point ever seen on Slashdot!
Also, to add to GP's response; you need to learn about false positives, then come back to the table with a useful solution if you have one.
--Jeremy
Seriously, who gives a shit what your uptime is? My Windows boxes tend to go for weeks between reboots, with frequent hibernation periods, only shutting down when there are critical updates. They happen when I'm not even using the computer, and when it starts back up it restarts most applications, so why would I even care if it happened every week or even every night?
If your best rebuttal to someone giving you shit about overpaying for a Mac is that it has 67 days of uptime, I'd suggest that maybe you should look for a better "killer feature" to brag about.
--Jeremy
So you'll only speak up if it's something you do have an interest in. Gotcha.
--Jeremy
That website, along with those it links to, are filled with some of the most egregious weasel speak I've seen since I started reading up on SEO. This dude is a professional patent troll.
--Jeremy
Can someone go after the ad network that shows the blatantly false "I made $77 an hour doing nothing!" and "Get an iPad for $44!"? These things show up all over the place -- CNN, NBA/NFL, Facebook -- and they are clearly scams, yet nobody seems to notice or do anything about them.
--Jeremy
Because, you know, realistic physics for each ship and every bullet adds *so* much to the game.
Just like when I play chess, I like it because of the realistic physics when someone starts throwing pieces around.
--Jeremy
Oh the irony. Don't you know that one of the biggest selling points for Chrono Trigger was the fact that it was a "dream team" of Squaresoft and Toriyama? The only reason there weren't cutscenes in the original is that it was beyond the ability of the technology of the time.
--Jeremy
Hypocrisy - look it up. I don't care one whit if Gingrich fucks a busload of nuns during his spare time. I *do* care when he (and his party) make "morality" part of the platform, and then turns around and violates said morals. Why the fuck should I vote for someone who violates one of his main promises?
Your failure to understand seems to stem from the fact that you (and other slow thinkers like you) think adultery is automatically bad, and that we wouldn't vote for someone based on who they do and/or don't put their dick in.
Just like when Obama said "I'm going to close Gitmo" and "I'm going to investigate AT&T over the warrantless wiretaps" and then didn't do either of those things. That loses him points. It would then be sheer hypocrisy if he were to open more detention facilities, or ask for more wiretaps. But if he decides he wants to screw Hillary Clinton on the side? I don't care -- he never told me he wouldn't, and it's not something I'd base a vote on anyway.
Do you get it? It's not the extra marital affairs we care about. It's the hypocrisy.
--Jeremy
Here's the difference. I'll go slowly and use small words so you might understand.
Clinton never ran on a platform of "family values" in the party of "family values" and "sanctity of marriage."
Do you get it now? Similarly, Clinton is the guy that said "I never inhaled," and we didn't hold it against him because he didn't run on an anti-drug platform. Clinton could have also been banging Al Gore, and we wouldn't have held it against either of them because neither one ran on a platform of "no homos!"
--Jeremy
Why does that statistic even matter? If it happens even once, it's too often. If it happens due to Sony's negligence, it's too often.
I suppose you're the kind of person who thinks, "well, only like 100 people were actually harmed by the data breach, so really it's not that bad. Sucks to be one of those 100 people." Or "Only 1% of executions are committed against innocent people, so really it's not that bad. Sucks to be one of those 1%."
--Jeremy
Spoken like a true collectivist. You sure you're not on the Socialism Weekly mailing list?
--Jeremy
You must not be a programmer.
I've written a lot of code that I'm perfectly confident in using, that I know works, that I've sold to clients, that I would never want another programmer to see. Stuff that I would like to reorganize and clean up, but haven't done yet given time and money constraints. Things where I know the code would be easier to read and maintain if I refactored my class structures, or used a different/newer API, or used a new trick/feature of the language that I didn't know when I started the project. However, none of those deficiencies imply anything about the code's functionality.
--Jeremy
Elvis isn't dead -- that was an impersonator. The real Elvis is living in a retirement home fighting Egyptian mummies.
--Jeremy
Read up on this. You're the dumb and/or uninformed one here.
--Jeremy