Yeah, right. One good hit and you're done. Most people who've had the opportunity to experience both will tell you they'd rather be shot - knives leave nasty wounds and, despite what you think, one guy with a knife who knows his stuff will take you apart.
Simple. They come home from the war, where things had a very immediate solution and applied those lessons at home. This is a documented side effect of people returning from combat.
I grew up next door to DC, which has banned guns for decades. Oddly enough, the people you don't want to have guns have them. Honest people couldn't even carry mace.
Getting a rifle when you're a felon is easy. You do it illegally, but since it's so easy to legally acquire a firearm and then 'lose' it, it's easy to get them illegally as well.
So basically, if you can buy a gun illegaly, it's relatively unfettered? Meanwhile, honest people can't buy guns and the criminals can. What fun, what fun.
The same way we enforce any other law - good police work, probable cause, search warrants. You figure out who sells guns illegally. You figure out who they sold them to. And then you go and arrest all those people.
Yeah, you have a lot more confidence in the police than I do. Do you really think that these guys keep records of who was sold a gun? Besides, the cops in bad areas are busy enough keeping up with the actual crime - do they really have time to stake out suspected gun peddlers? Lots easier just to make the guns available to normal people - makes criminals a bit more cautious.
Some criminals will always have guns. Therefore, there is no reason to control access to guns.
Perfectly reasonable. Limiting gun access generally affects only those people who weren't criminals in the first place, so you only impact the honest people.
Gun control allows you to identify and arrest criminals BEFORE they commit violent crime, because you have a chance to catch the criminal when they acquire the gun, instead of having to wait until the criminal starts shooting people.
How were you planning to do that? Randomly search people and their houses?
But complete unfettered access to firearms isn't the answer either.
Who says access is unfettered? Just and try to get a rifle when you're a convicted felon.
My counter point was that this distinction is invalid, as there was no such thing as illegal immigrants back when significant European immigration occurred.
That's pointless - the fact that immigration was open back in the day doesn't mean that it's okay to just show up when you haven't followed any of the rules we've set up. We have a right to set immigration policy. Refute that.
I'm not sure if thats true, we live in a different world today. Cheaper communication, faster transportation, and the explosion in diversity of media all spell out that differences between people are bound to increase, not decrease.
I argue the opposite: mass media and improved communication lead to fewer languages and less variation across distances. Even so, there are significant differences between city and rural, south and north.
Your ancestors probably didn't. Statistics show that Hispanic immigrants have roughly similar rates of English proficiency as 19th century German and early 20th century italian immigrants did.
And how many of them even attempt to learn english? That's a major difference.
As for legality, there was no such thing as an "illegal" immigrant until the 1920s, there was literally no legal concept.
Which basically means that we've had immigration laws as long as anyone's been alive. So what?
So this is really a moot point.
Bullshit. We have rules on who we let in, and we have the right to enforce them. This is a major part of the problem.
These groups and movements share negligent support from Mexican Americans. In fact, neither Aztlan or La Raza are functional groups, they both date to 1960 era student movements. It is not clear that they even exist anymore.
They do exist. You can debate the level of their influence, but they are still around.
Define American culture, and make sure that it includes every American citizen, something that everyone from New York City to Rural Alabama can agree on.
It's not a monoculture - you can identify a handful of broad cultures that account for the vast majority of Americans. Give it time and some of the differences between them will fade.
Come on, your ancestors came for money too. Doesn't Boston have its Irish pride marches all the time? I bet you must be fuming at the large number of American Jews who join the Israeli Military.
My ancestors assimilated, and the ones who didn't speak english learned. They also went the legal route and didn't demand that the people already here accomodate them. This is in stark contrast to the current wave of illegals, mostly from mexico.
America does not have a culture, this is what sets us apart from tired nation-states like France and Russia.
We've got a culture, it's just young.
I fail to see how Latin American immigrants are any different.
Well, they're mostly illegal and they bring groups with them like Aztlan and la Raza. The implication is that they want to convert some part of the US to another mexican state.
If Obama becomes president or a presidential front runner without being what they would consider a true black person( because of his well to be white heritage)
I thought it was because of his African heritage - he has no slaves in his bloodline.
This possesses a problem for them, If he is successful, the case could be made that America isn't racist any more. This leaves them without their importance in life.
Well, that's half right. They'd lose a lot of power, but it says nothing about America being racist. We are still racist in places - the KKK can sell tshirts about how they're the original boys in the hood - but we're much better than most other places.
Al and Jesse are trying to sabotage obama's chances to protect their interest.
Name one terrorist that the TSA has caught. Name one valid attack that the idiotic liquids ban would avert. Tell me how the hour long lines at Denver Intl. are safer than the way it was before - now any tool with a backpack full of explosives can kill hundreds, since there's an unsecured walkway above the lines.
What racist words? Saying that a bball team looks like gansters and calling them nappy headed hos is just normal slagging. The whole nappy headed insult is a target of opportunity and has nothing to do with skin color.
"ebonics" is rooted in racist practices (forced submission to white schemas of "black inferiority", denial of education, the list goes on and on).
Bullshit. Ebonics is an attempt to teach proper english to a bunch of people who speak a specific variant of english associated with poor education and violence. Surprise, surprise, it's mostly accurate. The whole point is that people judge you on the words you use, so using the right ones leads to success. Of course, some people will focus on the initial statement (which is true) that talking like an uneducated gangbanger won't get you far and characterize this as some sort of racist attitude. Give them the finger and offer the other guys a hand up.
it is at the same time promoted by and derided in mainstream america, with the obvious ulterior motive of promoting separatism.
Mostly promoted by black people with an interest in being separate and black. Let them be black and proud and poor if they want to. Associating education with being too white is the mark of an idiot. I have no pity.
weather it either supplants "normal" dialect, or is killed off, it should be eliminated as a separate dialect.
All dialects are separate. You can't really eliminate it by fiat, either - you have to let it expire. What will likely happen is that some of the ebonics bits will find their way into normal speech, and the rest will die a deserved death. 'Wif'? is 'th' so hard to say?
There are even still people who try to disenfranchise black people by making it harder for them to vote. Take a look at the elections in Florida where black people were systematically disenfranchised for having the same name as convicted felons. Take a look at Ohio where the corrupt Republican secretary of state deliberately distributed election equipment so that black people had to wait hours to vote while white people got to vote immediately.
It's not because they're black. It's because they vote Democrat. This isn't racism, it's just election fraud.
lacks the historical perspective that racism by whites is the bigger problem
who cares? The important thing is that racism by blacks is the bigger problem now. When you have kids getting beaten for being white because they do well in school and valuing being 'black' over being successful, it isn't the man keeping people down. It's your neighbors.
But, instead of losing respect for "minorities", maybe you could lose respect for "corporate bullshit", since that's what I would blame for the situation.
I find that it's not so much skin color that I pay attention to as it is culture - the recent illegal alien marches still irk me. We have a large group of people who don't even have the right to be here demanding concessions to their culture and needs. They don't have any intention of joining the dream, they're here for the money. So far as they're concerned, they're still mexican, and don't you forget it. We haven't kicked them out because they're cheap labor and we like that.
When has O'Reilly called a black person a nappy-headed ho?
What's the big deal? This is trash talk, not some sort of racial denigration. If they'd been white, it'd be 'bleached blond bimbo'. If you've forgotten, he also complimented another bball team in that same show, so it's not like he's racist. He's just being a shock jock.
Oh yeah, and Al and Jesse are out of line calling out Imus - bunch of race baiting attention whores.
I noticed some fascinating changes in the behaviour of other drivers towards me when I changed from driving a small, low-end car to a turbo-charged beast a few years ago.
Funny, I went from a WRX to an MR2 and people just stopped noticing me. It's a little glossy black thing that weighs nothing, so it's just as fast, but I'm invisible. I LOVE IT!
Cops are going to get hauled into court left, right, and center to defend running a red light. Think about it. The ticket will be issued automatically, probably multiple times per week, if not per day, per cop and THEN it's up to them to "prove" that they were justified.
I guess not running the light when there's no reason is out of the question? Besides, how hard is this, really? Get the tickets, correlate to police report for the incident that you were responding to, submit to judge.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, right. One good hit and you're done. Most people who've had the opportunity to experience both will tell you they'd rather be shot - knives leave nasty wounds and, despite what you think, one guy with a knife who knows his stuff will take you apart.
Simple. They come home from the war, where things had a very immediate solution and applied those lessons at home. This is a documented side effect of people returning from combat.
I grew up next door to DC, which has banned guns for decades. Oddly enough, the people you don't want to have guns have them. Honest people couldn't even carry mace.
Getting a rifle when you're a felon is easy. You do it illegally, but since it's so easy to legally acquire a firearm and then 'lose' it, it's easy to get them illegally as well.
So basically, if you can buy a gun illegaly, it's relatively unfettered? Meanwhile, honest people can't buy guns and the criminals can. What fun, what fun.
The same way we enforce any other law - good police work, probable cause, search warrants. You figure out who sells guns illegally. You figure out who they sold them to. And then you go and arrest all those people.
Yeah, you have a lot more confidence in the police than I do. Do you really think that these guys keep records of who was sold a gun? Besides, the cops in bad areas are busy enough keeping up with the actual crime - do they really have time to stake out suspected gun peddlers? Lots easier just to make the guns available to normal people - makes criminals a bit more cautious.
The strongest upside to this is that you can't massacre a crowd with a knife in the same way that you can a semi-automatic weapon.
Yeah, you can only get through about 5 or 6 guys.
The Second Amendment says nothing about allowing individual citizens to run around with firearms for whatever reason.
The supreme court disagrees with you.
Go read a book - the wild west is largely a creation of hollywood.
Some criminals will always have guns. Therefore, there is no reason to control access to guns.
Perfectly reasonable. Limiting gun access generally affects only those people who weren't criminals in the first place, so you only impact the honest people.
Gun control allows you to identify and arrest criminals BEFORE they commit violent crime, because you have a chance to catch the criminal when they acquire the gun, instead of having to wait until the criminal starts shooting people.
How were you planning to do that? Randomly search people and their houses?
But complete unfettered access to firearms isn't the answer either.
Who says access is unfettered? Just and try to get a rifle when you're a convicted felon.
That's why everyone in the army and the police force doesn't go shooting each other left and right.
No, they come home from the war and shoot their wife for screwing around.
My counter point was that this distinction is invalid, as there was no such thing as illegal immigrants back when significant European immigration occurred.
That's pointless - the fact that immigration was open back in the day doesn't mean that it's okay to just show up when you haven't followed any of the rules we've set up. We have a right to set immigration policy. Refute that.
I'm not sure if thats true, we live in a different world today. Cheaper communication, faster transportation, and the explosion in diversity of media all spell out that differences between people are bound to increase, not decrease.
I argue the opposite: mass media and improved communication lead to fewer languages and less variation across distances. Even so, there are significant differences between city and rural, south and north.
Your ancestors probably didn't. Statistics show that Hispanic immigrants have roughly similar rates of English proficiency as 19th century German and early 20th century italian immigrants did.
And how many of them even attempt to learn english? That's a major difference.
As for legality, there was no such thing as an "illegal" immigrant until the 1920s, there was literally no legal concept.
Which basically means that we've had immigration laws as long as anyone's been alive. So what?
So this is really a moot point.
Bullshit. We have rules on who we let in, and we have the right to enforce them. This is a major part of the problem.
These groups and movements share negligent support from Mexican Americans. In fact, neither Aztlan or La Raza are functional groups, they both date to 1960 era student movements. It is not clear that they even exist anymore.
They do exist. You can debate the level of their influence, but they are still around.
Define American culture, and make sure that it includes every American citizen, something that everyone from New York City to Rural Alabama can agree on.
It's not a monoculture - you can identify a handful of broad cultures that account for the vast majority of Americans. Give it time and some of the differences between them will fade.
Come on, your ancestors came for money too. Doesn't Boston have its Irish pride marches all the time? I bet you must be fuming at the large number of American Jews who join the Israeli Military.
My ancestors assimilated, and the ones who didn't speak english learned. They also went the legal route and didn't demand that the people already here accomodate them. This is in stark contrast to the current wave of illegals, mostly from mexico.
America does not have a culture, this is what sets us apart from tired nation-states like France and Russia.
We've got a culture, it's just young.
I fail to see how Latin American immigrants are any different.
Well, they're mostly illegal and they bring groups with them like Aztlan and la Raza. The implication is that they want to convert some part of the US to another mexican state.
If Obama becomes president or a presidential front runner without being what they would consider a true black person( because of his well to be white heritage)
I thought it was because of his African heritage - he has no slaves in his bloodline.
This possesses a problem for them, If he is successful, the case could be made that America isn't racist any more. This leaves them without their importance in life.
Well, that's half right. They'd lose a lot of power, but it says nothing about America being racist. We are still racist in places - the KKK can sell tshirts about how they're the original boys in the hood - but we're much better than most other places.
Al and Jesse are trying to sabotage obama's chances to protect their interest.
Don't doubt it, but this isn't part of that.
Too much work. Better to demo some random office parks at 2pm on a tuesday.
Name one terrorist that the TSA has caught. Name one valid attack that the idiotic liquids ban would avert. Tell me how the hour long lines at Denver Intl. are safer than the way it was before - now any tool with a backpack full of explosives can kill hundreds, since there's an unsecured walkway above the lines.
*chuckle*
What racist words? Saying that a bball team looks like gansters and calling them nappy headed hos is just normal slagging. The whole nappy headed insult is a target of opportunity and has nothing to do with skin color.
"ebonics" is rooted in racist practices (forced submission to white schemas of "black inferiority", denial of education, the list goes on and on).
Bullshit. Ebonics is an attempt to teach proper english to a bunch of people who speak a specific variant of english associated with poor education and violence. Surprise, surprise, it's mostly accurate. The whole point is that people judge you on the words you use, so using the right ones leads to success. Of course, some people will focus on the initial statement (which is true) that talking like an uneducated gangbanger won't get you far and characterize this as some sort of racist attitude. Give them the finger and offer the other guys a hand up.
it is at the same time promoted by and derided in mainstream america, with the obvious ulterior motive of promoting separatism.
Mostly promoted by black people with an interest in being separate and black. Let them be black and proud and poor if they want to. Associating education with being too white is the mark of an idiot. I have no pity.
weather it either supplants "normal" dialect, or is killed off, it should be eliminated as a separate dialect.
All dialects are separate. You can't really eliminate it by fiat, either - you have to let it expire. What will likely happen is that some of the ebonics bits will find their way into normal speech, and the rest will die a deserved death. 'Wif'? is 'th' so hard to say?
Duh, this whoe story is a troll.
There are even still people who try to disenfranchise black people by making it harder for them to vote. Take a look at the elections in Florida where black people were systematically disenfranchised for having the same name as convicted felons. Take a look at Ohio where the corrupt Republican secretary of state deliberately distributed election equipment so that black people had to wait hours to vote while white people got to vote immediately.
It's not because they're black. It's because they vote Democrat. This isn't racism, it's just election fraud.
lacks the historical perspective that racism by whites is the bigger problem
who cares? The important thing is that racism by blacks is the bigger problem now. When you have kids getting beaten for being white because they do well in school and valuing being 'black' over being successful, it isn't the man keeping people down. It's your neighbors.
But, instead of losing respect for "minorities", maybe you could lose respect for "corporate bullshit", since that's what I would blame for the situation.
I find that it's not so much skin color that I pay attention to as it is culture - the recent illegal alien marches still irk me. We have a large group of people who don't even have the right to be here demanding concessions to their culture and needs. They don't have any intention of joining the dream, they're here for the money. So far as they're concerned, they're still mexican, and don't you forget it. We haven't kicked them out because they're cheap labor and we like that.
He's a shock jock - this is what he does. It doesn't warrant moral outrage. It's just an insult.
When has O'Reilly called a black person a nappy-headed ho?
What's the big deal? This is trash talk, not some sort of racial denigration. If they'd been white, it'd be 'bleached blond bimbo'. If you've forgotten, he also complimented another bball team in that same show, so it's not like he's racist. He's just being a shock jock.
Oh yeah, and Al and Jesse are out of line calling out Imus - bunch of race baiting attention whores.
nah. Fire engines can ram a cop car no problem.
I noticed some fascinating changes in the behaviour of other drivers towards me when I changed from driving a small, low-end car to a turbo-charged beast a few years ago.
Funny, I went from a WRX to an MR2 and people just stopped noticing me. It's a little glossy black thing that weighs nothing, so it's just as fast, but I'm invisible. I LOVE IT!
Cops are going to get hauled into court left, right, and center to defend running a red light. Think about it. The ticket will be issued automatically, probably multiple times per week, if not per day, per cop and THEN it's up to them to "prove" that they were justified.
I guess not running the light when there's no reason is out of the question? Besides, how hard is this, really? Get the tickets, correlate to police report for the incident that you were responding to, submit to judge.