This is a total rip-off of Infiniti. There's even pictures on some of the infiniti boards that clearly point out how Hyundai has copied body mouldings, taillight designs, etc, from Infiniti.
Now they're even copying Infiniti's numbering scheme - G37, Q70, Q80, etc.
"“I know we are a smart enough nation to figure out how you protect responsible gun owners' rights and get guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them,” Mrs. Clinton replied."
Except that if that were true, then Clinton and the left wouldn't be constantly trying to ban a class of scary-looking rifles that are used in less murders than knives or even fists. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-t...
Compare 'rifles' to knives, blunt objects, or fists.
I've used a tablet to take notes, read books, do research, keep kids busy, surf the net etc over the last 6 or so years (I have a gen 1 Galaxy Tab 8.1)
The only thing I still use it for is reading books, and occasionally as an ODBII reader with Torque. It hasn't replaced anything, it's just another computer I use in situations where a smartphone isn't big enough (or I need the smartphone for something else) and a laptop is too big.
I may be completely wrong, but I thought FEC rules were If they take ads for one candidate/party they have to allow the other candidate/party to advertise as well.
The Jobs Don't Shift Upwards. If 100 people are displaced by robots, only 10% may find jobs making/fixing the robots. The other 90% are displaced into the labor supply, which lowers wages.
Robots/Automation for existing jobs Must Be Stopped.
If not outright halted, then either tax it so goddamn much it's not economically viable, or make robots/automation programs forbidden for corporations to own - let people own robots on a 1-1 basis. Sure, you can hire my robot for $50k/year + medical (for me) + service plan (for robot).
There's a problem all right, but it's not a gun problem. It's a failure to address the real problems (poverty, education, etc), coupled with a 'whitewashing' of the predominate demographic/cultural characteristics of the perpetrators. This is a problem with idiotic Democrats, who seem to think that removing weapons will solve the problem, and this is a problem with Republicans (and Libertarians) that worship rampant capitalism without any checks and balances of social welfare
The general myth that more guns = more violence is not supported by any real-world examination. The only place you can find such claims are in statistically overtweaked research put out by biased sources.
Case in point: Total murders 1980 - over 20,000. Number of firearms in America - ~170mil. US Population 220mil. Total Murders 2014 - ~15,000. Number of firearms in America - ~350mil . US Population 320mil.
100 Million more people, 180 million more firearms. 25% less murders.
Arguing that more guns = more murders/violence simply can't be supported, because over the last 35 years that theory has been completely disproven. It's a complete farce, just like the 'Video game and violence' theory, which again is disproved simply by looking at how youth violence has decreased by over 50% since 1990 (FBI), while violent video games have become one of the most profitable entertainment mediums today.
Go look at any of the gun violence sites that plot the incidents on an actual map. You will quickly see that the vast vast majority of gun violence (not suicides) occur in predominately in low-income, low-education areas of large metropolitan regions that are also predominately inhabited by minorities (and of that, predominately black.) Even if you try to point out 'white' states like Nebraska, Oklahoma, or even Minnesota have crime issues, you will still find the above claim regarding the overall demographics to be true.
Suicides are the other 'big lie' by the Anti-Gun crowd. 2/3rd of gun deaths are suicides, but the idea that reducing firearms reduces suicides is not supported. (There is a study out there that says reducing guns reduces gun suicides, but that's like saying removing electricity reduces electrocutions) In fact, the US has lower or equivalent suicide rates to countries that have strict gun control. Removing guns will just change the method, not the outcome.
Guns are a strawman and the NRA is just a boogieman to a group of people who can't look up basic numbers, understand basic research methods, or think past their organic, probiotic, cave-man, paleo-vegan diet.
This is a fantastic writeup of examples by steveha that demonstrates the very problem - the cliquish pseudo-academic types have been screaming their bloody heads off, acting like American millenials. They're hypocritical and mindless, and if they don't get their way they resort to name-calling and claiming that the other side gamed the system.
steveha used Baen as an example, and it serves perfectly. Baen has long published some of the most libertarian 'right-wing' authors, but in those books they've had the strongest female characters along with the widest variety of ethnic backgrounds and sexual orientations I've come across. The problem is that they're set in worlds in which hard work, rugged individualism, independence, logic, - all those 'right-wing' and/or 'conservative' values - rule the day.
100% True. Plus you have to realize that all resources consumed by the city have to be transported in. I've looked at a few studies regarding city vs rural resource usage and pollution and they regularly misunderstand and/or misattribute resource usage.
If 90% of meat/grain/food consumption is in cities - where 90% of humans reside - then 90% of the production costs - including wastes and transportation/fuel - should be included on the 'city' side of the ledger, but it's often not.
Most city dwellers don't realize that if the shit were really ever to hit the fan in a TEOTWAWKI-type situation, they'd be the first to die. Resources like food/water would dry up before they managed to walk out of the city.
"Republicans tend to like to obstruct, and get nothing done, they are generally assholes, and many are about as close to Mr. Burns as you can be without being a yellow cartoon character."
Myth. In general, they resist over-exuberant use of law as a tool to change society. SOMETIMES that's a bad thing, but more often than not, restraint and patience pay off. We have too many laws, so many that most arn't even enforced these days, and the impetus to make a new law is because of some media-manufactured crisis, is it so bad to be 'conservative' on this?
They may or may not be assholes any more than any other group, that seems to be an arbitrary label depending on whether or not you agree with them.
As for Mr. Burns, FYI Democrats get richer, faster, than Republicans in congress.
This argument has always been the stupidest one by the anti-gun crowd. (And is really one of the dumbest studies ever funded)
"Having guns in your home makes you more likely to be shot"
You don't say!?! Thank you Captain Obvious!
In other news, having a car makes you more likely to die in a car accident. Having electricity makes you far more likely to get electrocuted, and eating food makes you more likely to be poisoned.
"Which is among the most bizarre reactions ever. I'm amazed how many people have the delusion that they are going to defend themselves with a gun despite the clear evidence that it almost never actually happens"
Actually, it happens multiple times every day. The thing is, unless someone actually dies or gets arrested, it doesn't make the evening news. And if nobody is hurt and the bad guy runs away, most people don't go calling the cops after the event is over and done, there's no point.
3 of which have been during deer season: One, a woman didn't unload her firearm before passing it up to her boyfriend in a tree stand (gun safety 101) The other two were self-inflicted accidents of some sort, seemingly unsafe handling.
More hunters died from heart attacks and car accidents though.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a total rip-off of Infiniti. There's even pictures on some of the infiniti boards that clearly point out how Hyundai has copied body mouldings, taillight designs, etc, from Infiniti.
Now they're even copying Infiniti's numbering scheme - G37, Q70, Q80, etc.
"“I know we are a smart enough nation to figure out how you protect responsible gun owners' rights and get guns out of the hands of people who shouldn't have them,” Mrs. Clinton replied."
Except that if that were true, then Clinton and the left wouldn't be constantly trying to ban a class of scary-looking rifles that are used in less murders than knives or even fists. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-t...
Compare 'rifles' to knives, blunt objects, or fists.
Left and Right are always relative to each other.
Don't you Euros have other things to worry about these days?
I'm 99% sure it's an AI adding this shit to the posts.
I've used a tablet to take notes, read books, do research, keep kids busy, surf the net etc over the last 6 or so years (I have a gen 1 Galaxy Tab 8.1)
The only thing I still use it for is reading books, and occasionally as an ODBII reader with Torque. It hasn't replaced anything, it's just another computer I use in situations where a smartphone isn't big enough (or I need the smartphone for something else) and a laptop is too big.
"Airbnb contends the new rule violates the Communications Decency Act, Stored Communications Act and the First Amendment."
When has law and/or common sense stopped the City of San Francisco from doing what it wanted?
I may be completely wrong, but I thought FEC rules were If they take ads for one candidate/party they have to allow the other candidate/party to advertise as well.
Common and popular myth, but still a myth.
The Jobs Don't Shift Upwards. If 100 people are displaced by robots, only 10% may find jobs making/fixing the robots. The other 90% are displaced into the labor supply, which lowers wages.
Robots/Automation for existing jobs Must Be Stopped.
If not outright halted, then either tax it so goddamn much it's not economically viable, or make robots/automation programs forbidden for corporations to own - let people own robots on a 1-1 basis. Sure, you can hire my robot for $50k/year + medical (for me) + service plan (for robot).
"Why not include the financial sector in this analysis? I'm sure it holds enough corporate cash to make the tech sector seem insignificant."
Because it probably doesn't exist.
There's a problem all right, but it's not a gun problem. It's a failure to address the real problems (poverty, education, etc), coupled with a 'whitewashing' of the predominate demographic/cultural characteristics of the perpetrators. This is a problem with idiotic Democrats, who seem to think that removing weapons will solve the problem, and this is a problem with Republicans (and Libertarians) that worship rampant capitalism without any checks and balances of social welfare
The general myth that more guns = more violence is not supported by any real-world examination. The only place you can find such claims are in statistically overtweaked research put out by biased sources.
Case in point:
Total murders 1980 - over 20,000. Number of firearms in America - ~170mil. US Population 220mil.
Total Murders 2014 - ~15,000. Number of firearms in America - ~350mil . US Population 320mil.
100 Million more people, 180 million more firearms. 25% less murders.
Arguing that more guns = more murders/violence simply can't be supported, because over the last 35 years that theory has been completely disproven. It's a complete farce, just like the 'Video game and violence' theory, which again is disproved simply by looking at how youth violence has decreased by over 50% since 1990 (FBI), while violent video games have become one of the most profitable entertainment mediums today.
Go look at any of the gun violence sites that plot the incidents on an actual map. You will quickly see that the vast vast majority of gun violence (not suicides) occur in predominately in low-income, low-education areas of large metropolitan regions that are also predominately inhabited by minorities (and of that, predominately black.) Even if you try to point out 'white' states like Nebraska, Oklahoma, or even Minnesota have crime issues, you will still find the above claim regarding the overall demographics to be true.
Suicides are the other 'big lie' by the Anti-Gun crowd. 2/3rd of gun deaths are suicides, but the idea that reducing firearms reduces suicides is not supported. (There is a study out there that says reducing guns reduces gun suicides, but that's like saying removing electricity reduces electrocutions)
In fact, the US has lower or equivalent suicide rates to countries that have strict gun control. Removing guns will just change the method, not the outcome.
Guns are a strawman and the NRA is just a boogieman to a group of people who can't look up basic numbers, understand basic research methods, or think past their organic, probiotic, cave-man, paleo-vegan diet.
This is a fantastic writeup of examples by steveha that demonstrates the very problem - the cliquish pseudo-academic types have been screaming their bloody heads off, acting like American millenials. They're hypocritical and mindless, and if they don't get their way they resort to name-calling and claiming that the other side gamed the system.
steveha used Baen as an example, and it serves perfectly. Baen has long published some of the most libertarian 'right-wing' authors, but in those books they've had the strongest female characters along with the widest variety of ethnic backgrounds and sexual orientations I've come across. The problem is that they're set in worlds in which hard work, rugged individualism, independence, logic, - all those 'right-wing' and/or 'conservative' values - rule the day.
100% True. Plus you have to realize that all resources consumed by the city have to be transported in. I've looked at a few studies regarding city vs rural resource usage and pollution and they regularly misunderstand and/or misattribute resource usage.
If 90% of meat/grain/food consumption is in cities - where 90% of humans reside - then 90% of the production costs - including wastes and transportation/fuel - should be included on the 'city' side of the ledger, but it's often not.
Most city dwellers don't realize that if the shit were really ever to hit the fan in a TEOTWAWKI-type situation, they'd be the first to die. Resources like food/water would dry up before they managed to walk out of the city.
Even if China did implement it, each country sets their own targets so China will likely do nothing anyway.
Also, to clarify, the US is only ~15% of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. China is 30%.
"Republicans tend to like to obstruct, and get nothing done, they are generally assholes, and many are about as close to Mr. Burns as you can be without being a yellow cartoon character."
Myth. In general, they resist over-exuberant use of law as a tool to change society. SOMETIMES that's a bad thing, but more often than not, restraint and patience pay off. We have too many laws, so many that most arn't even enforced these days, and the impetus to make a new law is because of some media-manufactured crisis, is it so bad to be 'conservative' on this?
They may or may not be assholes any more than any other group, that seems to be an arbitrary label depending on whether or not you agree with them.
As for Mr. Burns, FYI Democrats get richer, faster, than Republicans in congress.
Apple's been unlocking phones behind the scenes for the government for years. This is just theatrics for Apple's public image.
In the case of the NSA, they just make the companies hold (mine) the info.
Flint is an issue with naturally acidic water eating away lead pipes, and the corruption of the leadership that failed to act.
Expand that 100x - but with corporate water and air pollution - and you'll have the average city in China.
Hey, you who writes 'conservative' in partial caps. Go back to whatever hole you normally troll, we expect better here.
This argument has always been the stupidest one by the anti-gun crowd. (And is really one of the dumbest studies ever funded)
"Having guns in your home makes you more likely to be shot"
You don't say!?! Thank you Captain Obvious!
In other news, having a car makes you more likely to die in a car accident. Having electricity makes you far more likely to get electrocuted, and eating food makes you more likely to be poisoned.
Since when do voluntary contributions negate libertarian principles?
Freedom Of Association, Freedom of Movement, etc.
You'd rather the people just remain where they are and not make a fuss?
"You make it sound as though "liberty minded people" is some sort of code word for fascist."
Now days it _is_ 'code' for fascist, or for anti-government, or white militia, etc.
Anyone who even mentions Thomas Jefferson is one step away from being a racist, gun-toting, extremist radical according to the BBC.
The books were interesting, but pretty boring. Very slow moving.
"Which is among the most bizarre reactions ever. I'm amazed how many people have the delusion that they are going to defend themselves with a gun despite the clear evidence that it almost never actually happens"
Actually, it happens multiple times every day. The thing is, unless someone actually dies or gets arrested, it doesn't make the evening news. And if nobody is hurt and the bad guy runs away, most people don't go calling the cops after the event is over and done, there's no point.
This is one from last night... http://www.wbaltv.com/news/pol...
Unfortunately there have been 5 deaths hunting in Wisconsin this year.
http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/hunt/I...
3 of which have been during deer season:
One, a woman didn't unload her firearm before passing it up to her boyfriend in a tree stand (gun safety 101)
The other two were self-inflicted accidents of some sort, seemingly unsafe handling.
More hunters died from heart attacks and car accidents though.