No shit -- after a full season, Madden actually improved my real-life 40 times by over half a second, I'm a much better tackler, *and* I'm better at hanging on to the ball.
Speaking of facts, what I don't see you doing is telling me why my facts are mistaken
You haven't provided ANY facts with respect to effectiveness of CCW or gun control laws. You have provided nothing but unsubstantiated bullshit. It's tough to point out mistaken facts when there isn't a single one in *any* of your posts.
I provided you with some facts a couple of posts ago; how about you start refuting those?
Many people fail to understand that for the same reason they fail to understand that states which enact conceal-carry laws experience lower rates of violent crime
Bullshit. There are absolutely no statistics that back this up. John Lott tried to massage some data to show that they do, but his study was seriously flawed and he was a gun advocate with an agenda looking to make a point, and it has since been soundly refuted. Here's a pretty good summary of the whole thing.
About the only thing that you *can* say with certainty is that *more* guns don't necessarily lead to more crime.
they pretend that the facts are just someone's perspective, like an opinion. It's... disturbing when you really think about it.
Let's see some of your facts. All you brought was bullshit and innuendo, and accused anyone who disagrees with you of being indoctrinated with religious anti-gun doctrine.
I've said before; I'm not anti-gun, my family owns guns and I grew up around them, I've used them in the past. Now, personally, I have no use for them in my life. I don't think eliminating all guns will magically solve the underlying problems that lead to gun violence in the first place. *However*, pro-gun "everyone needs to be carrying a gun" idiots really make me sick. At least the anti-gun crowd has a point: in an ideal world where there are no guns, there will be no gun violence. Pro-gun idiots take the stance: in an ideal world where everyone has guns, there will be no gun violence -- which has got to be one of the most mentally stunted twists of logic I've ever heard.
a) They aren't going around killing people. It's tough to get ransom money for dead people. It's a lot like terrorist plane hijackings used to be -- they take over, go land it somewhere safe, make some demands, everyone plays along, and nobody gets hurt.
b) If you have to stoop to the level of your scruple-less enemy, how are you any better? "Take care when fighting monsters to not become one yourself" and all that.
Well, government printed the money that went into my wallet in the first place. It's one of the advantages of HAVING a government, so we don't have to barter pretty stones and seashells to get what we want.
If it wants some of it back so it can continue to function and save me a lot of time by not having to build my own roads, lobby every car manufacturer to "please, won't you make cars that meet these better emissions standards?", and provide other basic services, I guess I can live with that.
Of course they're also harder and expensive and not as easy of political targets.
Are they really more expensive though? Law enforcement and incarceration are really damn expensive. After someone has been through the legal and prison system, they become very difficult to employ, which leaves them dependent on other resources (like rehab clinics, or welfare, or whatever) anyway.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point; just disagreeing about the misconception that alternatives are somehow expensive. If you look at it as an investment, it's going to cost money, obviously, but in the long run it pays for itself in lower costs. Similar to how universal health care (should) work. Sure, you might have a bunch of people going in for unneeded $70 doctor's visits or to kick that crack habit, but if it saves you one $50k amputation and dialysis for life, or one 10-year prison sentence at $40k/prisoner/year, it looks like a much better ROI.
"Bring a gun to a knife fight" is just a reference to bringing overwhelming force against opposition. If your opponent has a knife, you bring a knife and have roughly equal odds of survival. You bring a gun and remove all doubt. Your opponent spends $1 million on his campaign, you spend $100 million on yours. If you want to win, leave no doubt. Get it? Or did you really think Obama was talking about carrying a gun?
As for crosshairs? How about this? Personally, I can see the difference between the symbolism of marking someone with crosshairs as a target for "defeat" as opposed to one that needs to be shot. Some nuts, obviously, can't. While I don't believe that anyone was calling for anyone's death, I will point out that whoever releases these images should realize that they hold some accountability for how people will interpret them. Personal accountability has never been a strong part for politicians though.
Also, interestingly, your 3rd link at verumserum calls out the media for getting all worked up over Palin's crosshair. The EXACT SAME LOGIC could be applied to your chest-thumping about how some Democrats put bullseyes on maps. On top of that, those bullseyes were just on a map; they weren't crosshairs superimposed over an actual person's face.
And, finally, how many are dead now due to violence from the left?
Animal Farm was NOT anti-communist. It was anti-totalitarian. If you actually read it, you'd see how communism did quite well until Napoleon's totalitarian regime took over.
Those two right there should be enough to show you how much Apple cares about its users -- charging them $80 for their special power cables and $50 or $100 to replace a battery that they so kindly made impossible to replace without breaking open the device.
My Macbook Pro has *zero* case screws on the back side. If I ever need to upgrade/replace anything, even as simple as a hard drive or memory, it's disassembly time. God forbid I should want to carry around a spare battery in case I'm going to be away from a power source for an extended period of time.
No, that's how the left sees things. They can't fathom that business owners make more money when more people are making more money to spend.
/golfclap
This is the ENTIRE FUCKING PHILOSOPHY of the "left", summed up in ONE SENTENCE.
I don't know shit about your political viewpoints except that you don't understand what the left wants, so I won't try to strawman you with some political position that you may or may not agree with, so I'll just leave it at that. Your problem is that *you* don't understand the liberal position.
I think what he's saying is that if he left a $100 bill on the bar and went to the bathroom, he wouldn't expect it to still be there when he got back.
I guess that reading isn't as fun for you though, because with your misinterpretation you get to call the GP a thief. Name calling is so much fun and adds so much to the discussion, right?
So you're implying that it's ok to have a whistleblowing/leak website, just as long as nobody documents how to submit documents to the website?
It's ok for a whistleblower to give documentation to a news reporter, just as long as the reporter doesn't say "mail them to my P.O. box at this address"?
It's ok for a reporter to receive leaks, as long as they make sure that they don't prioritize any one leak above any other and make sure to read through their entire inbox before reporting on any of them?
And most people are bloodthirsty bastards who make snap judgments and love to see police beatings (see: Cops) and would happily have public hangings for even minor offenses without a moment's thought.
People like you are why we can't have effective government.
What's really funny is that no regulation vs. regulation written by the those who (should) be the ones that have to comply with it ends up being effectively the same thing. So we're really no worse off than we were before... Except now you get to hold this up as an example of how government doesn't work and expect us to find you insightful.
Slashdot Mirror
That's all well and good, but it still doesn't change the fact that MacOS didn't even have *any* form of preemptive multitasking before OSX.
--Jeremy
According to what I've read, every song in Rock Band 3 has instructions on how to play them in "pro mode" for both keyboard and guitar.
--Jeremy
If you were annoyed by everything that people post videos online of, you'd be annoyed by *everything*.
If you're annoyed by videos of people playing GH/RB online, then don't fucking watch them. It's not that hard.
--Jeremy
No shit -- after a full season, Madden actually improved my real-life 40 times by over half a second, I'm a much better tackler, *and* I'm better at hanging on to the ball.
Still need to work on my passing accuracy though.
--Jeremy
You are twisting around language to make the it sound like this guy committed a crime.
What axe do you have to grind against him, personally?
--Jeremy
Yes, I'm replying to you multiple times.
You haven't provided ANY facts with respect to effectiveness of CCW or gun control laws. You have provided nothing but unsubstantiated bullshit. It's tough to point out mistaken facts when there isn't a single one in *any* of your posts.
I provided you with some facts a couple of posts ago; how about you start refuting those?
--Jeremy
And your concealed carry crime statistics can't even show a correlation. I'll say again; your argument is bullshit and you have nothing to back it up.
--Jeremy
Bullshit. There are absolutely no statistics that back this up. John Lott tried to massage some data to show that they do, but his study was seriously flawed and he was a gun advocate with an agenda looking to make a point, and it has since been soundly refuted. Here's a pretty good summary of the whole thing.
About the only thing that you *can* say with certainty is that *more* guns don't necessarily lead to more crime.
Let's see some of your facts. All you brought was bullshit and innuendo, and accused anyone who disagrees with you of being indoctrinated with religious anti-gun doctrine.
I've said before; I'm not anti-gun, my family owns guns and I grew up around them, I've used them in the past. Now, personally, I have no use for them in my life. I don't think eliminating all guns will magically solve the underlying problems that lead to gun violence in the first place. *However*, pro-gun "everyone needs to be carrying a gun" idiots really make me sick. At least the anti-gun crowd has a point: in an ideal world where there are no guns, there will be no gun violence. Pro-gun idiots take the stance: in an ideal world where everyone has guns, there will be no gun violence -- which has got to be one of the most mentally stunted twists of logic I've ever heard.
--Jeremy
a) They aren't going around killing people. It's tough to get ransom money for dead people. It's a lot like terrorist plane hijackings used to be -- they take over, go land it somewhere safe, make some demands, everyone plays along, and nobody gets hurt.
b) If you have to stoop to the level of your scruple-less enemy, how are you any better? "Take care when fighting monsters to not become one yourself" and all that.
--Jeremy
[Citation needed]
The rest of your post stems from that point, and it all reeks of unsubstantiated bullshit.
--Jeremy
Well, government printed the money that went into my wallet in the first place. It's one of the advantages of HAVING a government, so we don't have to barter pretty stones and seashells to get what we want.
If it wants some of it back so it can continue to function and save me a lot of time by not having to build my own roads, lobby every car manufacturer to "please, won't you make cars that meet these better emissions standards?", and provide other basic services, I guess I can live with that.
--Jeremy
Are they really more expensive though? Law enforcement and incarceration are really damn expensive. After someone has been through the legal and prison system, they become very difficult to employ, which leaves them dependent on other resources (like rehab clinics, or welfare, or whatever) anyway.
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point; just disagreeing about the misconception that alternatives are somehow expensive. If you look at it as an investment, it's going to cost money, obviously, but in the long run it pays for itself in lower costs. Similar to how universal health care (should) work. Sure, you might have a bunch of people going in for unneeded $70 doctor's visits or to kick that crack habit, but if it saves you one $50k amputation and dialysis for life, or one 10-year prison sentence at $40k/prisoner/year, it looks like a much better ROI.
--Jeremy
Agreed.
Isn't selective quoting fun?
--Jeremy
Woot! A new freak! And an idiot to boot!
"Bring a gun to a knife fight" is just a reference to bringing overwhelming force against opposition. If your opponent has a knife, you bring a knife and have roughly equal odds of survival. You bring a gun and remove all doubt. Your opponent spends $1 million on his campaign, you spend $100 million on yours. If you want to win, leave no doubt. Get it? Or did you really think Obama was talking about carrying a gun?
As for crosshairs? How about this? Personally, I can see the difference between the symbolism of marking someone with crosshairs as a target for "defeat" as opposed to one that needs to be shot. Some nuts, obviously, can't. While I don't believe that anyone was calling for anyone's death, I will point out that whoever releases these images should realize that they hold some accountability for how people will interpret them. Personal accountability has never been a strong part for politicians though.
Also, interestingly, your 3rd link at verumserum calls out the media for getting all worked up over Palin's crosshair. The EXACT SAME LOGIC could be applied to your chest-thumping about how some Democrats put bullseyes on maps. On top of that, those bullseyes were just on a map; they weren't crosshairs superimposed over an actual person's face.
And, finally, how many are dead now due to violence from the left?
--Jeremy
Animal Farm was NOT anti-communist. It was anti-totalitarian. If you actually read it, you'd see how communism did quite well until Napoleon's totalitarian regime took over.
--Jeremy
Yeah. Let them eat cake. Fucking ingrates.
--Jeremy
It's not fragmentation when he does it. It's innovation.
--Jeremy
No user-serviceable batteries.
Non-standard connectors for nearly everything.
Those two right there should be enough to show you how much Apple cares about its users -- charging them $80 for their special power cables and $50 or $100 to replace a battery that they so kindly made impossible to replace without breaking open the device.
My Macbook Pro has *zero* case screws on the back side. If I ever need to upgrade/replace anything, even as simple as a hard drive or memory, it's disassembly time. God forbid I should want to carry around a spare battery in case I'm going to be away from a power source for an extended period of time.
--Jeremy
This is the ENTIRE FUCKING PHILOSOPHY of the "left", summed up in ONE SENTENCE.
I don't know shit about your political viewpoints except that you don't understand what the left wants, so I won't try to strawman you with some political position that you may or may not agree with, so I'll just leave it at that. Your problem is that *you* don't understand the liberal position.
--Jeremy
Oh bullshit.
I really don't have anything more to say in response to that nonsense.
--Jeremy
And for those keeping score, here we have an excellent example of begging the question.
--Jeremy
I think what he's saying is that if he left a $100 bill on the bar and went to the bathroom, he wouldn't expect it to still be there when he got back.
I guess that reading isn't as fun for you though, because with your misinterpretation you get to call the GP a thief. Name calling is so much fun and adds so much to the discussion, right?
--Jeremy
Wait...
So you're implying that it's ok to have a whistleblowing/leak website, just as long as nobody documents how to submit documents to the website?
It's ok for a whistleblower to give documentation to a news reporter, just as long as the reporter doesn't say "mail them to my P.O. box at this address"?
It's ok for a reporter to receive leaks, as long as they make sure that they don't prioritize any one leak above any other and make sure to read through their entire inbox before reporting on any of them?
That's some brilliant logic right there.
--Jeremy
And most people are bloodthirsty bastards who make snap judgments and love to see police beatings (see: Cops) and would happily have public hangings for even minor offenses without a moment's thought.
--Jeremy
People like you are why we can't have effective government.
What's really funny is that no regulation vs. regulation written by the those who (should) be the ones that have to comply with it ends up being effectively the same thing. So we're really no worse off than we were before... Except now you get to hold this up as an example of how government doesn't work and expect us to find you insightful.
--Jeremy