Sometimes the gang bangers come to you. And for some people who can't afford better neighborhoods, there's no choice. And really, I don't see how "stay out of this part of town" is a real solution to the dangers.
The point here is that gun violence is limited to the ghetto and is not indicative of the general level of violence in the country.
What about a project who used the GPL but charges for the product like Redhat enterprise server or something.
That's a commercial venture run for profit; shouldn't it get different treatment than someone releasing an OSS drawing app that they made for fun? Anyway, if you get support, there's an implication that the product is suitable for common server tasks.
But give your average joe who doesn't handle guns a 9mm and ask him to hit a running/dodging person at 50ft on one clip? Fat chance. A trained soldier or cop?
Your average joe that already has a 9mm will probably do as well or better than the cop, while the soldier trains mostly with rifles. Personally, I could probably hit someone like that at 50ft, but it'd take 3 or 4 shots.
Why don't cops start shooting at fleeing suspects 99% of the time?
Well, most of the time, they don't justify summary execution - if it's some guy who isn't wanted on a felony warrant and isn't suspected of a violent crime, then how exactly would you justify shooting him as he runs?
If you can't defend yourself without a gun, perhaps guns are too easily obtainable.
Tell that to my grandmother.
putting up with danger from gun nuts
without the epidemic of gun violence we face
Stay away from gang bangers and all that gun violence goes away. Gun nuts are pretty safe - the level of violence outside of black on black situations is actually pretty low. Last time I checked, it was around 3000 homicides per year. Much safer than driving.
And I do completely support the right to have hunting rifles.
The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting, it's there for defense against foreign powers and armed insurrection.
Professional soldiers who have trained extensively with firearms tend to average a couple thousand rounds per kill.
That's because of two things: suppressive fire, which just keeps the target's head down, and training, which burns through tons of ammo without killing anyone. Snipers, who have trained extensively in accuracy against designated targets, average about 1.3 rounds per kill.
Look at an example of a worst case scenario such as the Columbine killings, where two heavily armed kids were in a target-dense environment with no serious concern over defense and yet "only" killed 12 and wounded 24
Harris and Kleibold weren't planning to shoot everyone - guns were for mop up. Their original plan was to blow the place up with propane bombs and shoot the survivors. For an example of how that might play out, check the 'bath school disaster'.
reality has shown time and again that guns are scarier than they are dangerous when put into actual practice.
Sure, when dealing with multiple targets. If you're the only target, things are a whole lot different.
I would go so far as to say 60% of the population couldn't hit 550 if they tried (don't try). On the flip side, it turns out that I can get to 200 and perhaps a little bit under with only the smallest awareness of what goes in my mouth.
In all fairness, your description fits what we have now wrt health care. Never mind that most people don't have access to decent health care or they think they do until they get sick. Moving to a cheaper system like is used in places such as denmark can fix some of our problems while providing coverage to more people. The big wins will be removing health insurance providers who spend more on denying coverage than paying claims and reap obscene profits and a move to more preventative care - doctor visits are way cheaper than the ER, but if you don't have insurance, you go to the ER and don't pay.
Your example fails because internalmail.company.com will resolve through company.com
Maybe he's using the cisco client - it looks at external DNS first, then tries the VPN DNS. Most companies don't publish their internal DNS to the world, just within the company network.
Exactly how many people can get to 550 lbs at age 14 without help that borders on abuse? Metabolism is affected by activity levels, and kids should be at least somewhat active; what I'm saying boils down to so what? If the parents were doing their job, he might still be fat, but he wouldn't be literally round.
In fact, the real irony is that, if a cop were standing outside a bar and tried to ask you a few questions, and you refused to answer, you might *give* them probably cause to insist on a breathalyzer test.
So you're saying that the cop might do it, but it might not be legal. Right...
Stopping me from getting in my car is the definition of detaining, and me walking out of a bar doesn't mean I'm drunk. It's legal to drink and drive so long as you don't drink too much.
One of the excuses I've heard for refusing to decriminalize or flat out legalize various drugs is because they can't be easily detected in a roadside test. See, if you're trying to nail a drunk driver, you've got the breathalizer. It's easy, then, to tell if a person is intoxicated while driving, and it provides solid evidence in a court case. But with recreational drugs, no such test has existed, up until this point. Instead, they had to drag you down to the station and you had to submit to a blood test, at which point the drug may have metabolized, rendering the results useless.
Imagine that, you'd actually have to prove he was behaving poorly.
Sure, so instead they'll look for people who blow a hair over 0.15. It's the same damn thing, just a different line. How is that any better, in your mind?
Because you're pretty much guaranteed to be wasted at.15. You also eliminate diabetics and people who register.02 high for whatever reason. This is the same reason lots of places define daylight hours in their traffic code as extending from before sunrise past sunset - you make sure that the line isn't in a gray area.
Anyway, the real bodycount is all those people at.15 and above.
Oh no. So inconvenient! God forbid that, upon leaving a bar, a cop should ask you a few questions before allowing you to get behind the wheel. OHNOES!
Yeah, pretty much. Where does a cop get off detaining me without due cause? If you don't like the 4th ammendment, go to the UK or something.
It's just your single minded little brain that seems to insist that *any* questioning of bar patrons by cops in order to determine level of intoxication somehow equates to "harassment".
It does. If you're having trouble walking properly and carrying keys, then sure, a cop can stop you (and call a cab), but if you're just coming out of a bar, then he can sod off.
There is a biological basis - if you block the receptors, you will go through withdrawal. However, pot takes so long to filter out that it just doesn't matter.
Damn straight: I'm entitled too. I'm entitled to a fair shake, and what I see is the boomers doing their best to take the ladder they climbed and pull it up after them. I also see that our wealth imbalance is way out of whack: CEOs make millions per year, while the jobs that paid $100k in 1995 pay $110k today even though things are 50% more expensive. From what data I've found, wages have stagnated as long as I've been alive - this isn't fair and it's only going to lead to trouble.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah, um, you brought up something about hunting, which has nothing to do with the rest of the thread. Why?
Sometimes the gang bangers come to you. And for some people who can't afford better neighborhoods, there's no choice. And really, I don't see how "stay out of this part of town" is a real solution to the dangers.
The point here is that gun violence is limited to the ghetto and is not indicative of the general level of violence in the country.
I know what the 2nd amendment is about
So why the comment about hunting?
What about a project who used the GPL but charges for the product like Redhat enterprise server or something.
That's a commercial venture run for profit; shouldn't it get different treatment than someone releasing an OSS drawing app that they made for fun? Anyway, if you get support, there's an implication that the product is suitable for common server tasks.
But give your average joe who doesn't handle guns a 9mm and ask him to hit a running/dodging person at 50ft on one clip? Fat chance. A trained soldier or cop?
Your average joe that already has a 9mm will probably do as well or better than the cop, while the soldier trains mostly with rifles. Personally, I could probably hit someone like that at 50ft, but it'd take 3 or 4 shots.
Why don't cops start shooting at fleeing suspects 99% of the time?
Well, most of the time, they don't justify summary execution - if it's some guy who isn't wanted on a felony warrant and isn't suspected of a violent crime, then how exactly would you justify shooting him as he runs?
I read it as "charged with writing POS software", but interpreted it as a criminal charge.
If you can't defend yourself without a gun, perhaps guns are too easily obtainable.
Tell that to my grandmother.
putting up with danger from gun nuts
without the epidemic of gun violence we face
Stay away from gang bangers and all that gun violence goes away. Gun nuts are pretty safe - the level of violence outside of black on black situations is actually pretty low. Last time I checked, it was around 3000 homicides per year. Much safer than driving.
And I do completely support the right to have hunting rifles.
The 2nd amendment isn't about hunting, it's there for defense against foreign powers and armed insurrection.
Professional soldiers who have trained extensively with firearms tend to average a couple thousand rounds per kill.
That's because of two things: suppressive fire, which just keeps the target's head down, and training, which burns through tons of ammo without killing anyone. Snipers, who have trained extensively in accuracy against designated targets, average about 1.3 rounds per kill.
Look at an example of a worst case scenario such as the Columbine killings, where two heavily armed kids were in a target-dense environment with no serious concern over defense and yet "only" killed 12 and wounded 24
Harris and Kleibold weren't planning to shoot everyone - guns were for mop up. Their original plan was to blow the place up with propane bombs and shoot the survivors. For an example of how that might play out, check the 'bath school disaster'.
reality has shown time and again that guns are scarier than they are dangerous when put into actual practice.
Sure, when dealing with multiple targets. If you're the only target, things are a whole lot different.
I would go so far as to say 60% of the population couldn't hit 550 if they tried (don't try). On the flip side, it turns out that I can get to 200 and perhaps a little bit under with only the smallest awareness of what goes in my mouth.
In all fairness, your description fits what we have now wrt health care. Never mind that most people don't have access to decent health care or they think they do until they get sick. Moving to a cheaper system like is used in places such as denmark can fix some of our problems while providing coverage to more people. The big wins will be removing health insurance providers who spend more on denying coverage than paying claims and reap obscene profits and a move to more preventative care - doctor visits are way cheaper than the ER, but if you don't have insurance, you go to the ER and don't pay.
Your example fails because internalmail.company.com will resolve through company.com
Maybe he's using the cisco client - it looks at external DNS first, then tries the VPN DNS. Most companies don't publish their internal DNS to the world, just within the company network.
Apparently in China fevers involve a bruised/bloodied face and handcuffs.
Why do you think avian flu was such a big deal?
One person died due to abuse - why wouldn't we do what we can to prevent a recurrence?
Exactly how many people can get to 550 lbs at age 14 without help that borders on abuse? Metabolism is affected by activity levels, and kids should be at least somewhat active; what I'm saying boils down to so what? If the parents were doing their job, he might still be fat, but he wouldn't be literally round.
In fact, the real irony is that, if a cop were standing outside a bar and tried to ask you a few questions, and you refused to answer, you might *give* them probably cause to insist on a breathalyzer test.
So you're saying that the cop might do it, but it might not be legal. Right...
By that definition, a cop can "detain" you for any reason they want to.
No they can't. They need probable cause/reasonable suspicion that some crime is being committed/will be committed.
No, but it increases the odds substantially, and that sounds like "due cause" to me.
'due cause' is not a cop thing. 'Probable cause' is. I don't think this rises to that level.
Stopping me from getting in my car is the definition of detaining, and me walking out of a bar doesn't mean I'm drunk. It's legal to drink and drive so long as you don't drink too much.
One of the excuses I've heard for refusing to decriminalize or flat out legalize various drugs is because they can't be easily detected in a roadside test. See, if you're trying to nail a drunk driver, you've got the breathalizer. It's easy, then, to tell if a person is intoxicated while driving, and it provides solid evidence in a court case. But with recreational drugs, no such test has existed, up until this point. Instead, they had to drag you down to the station and you had to submit to a blood test, at which point the drug may have metabolized, rendering the results useless.
Imagine that, you'd actually have to prove he was behaving poorly.
Sure, so instead they'll look for people who blow a hair over 0.15. It's the same damn thing, just a different line. How is that any better, in your mind?
Because you're pretty much guaranteed to be wasted at .15. You also eliminate diabetics and people who register .02 high for whatever reason. This is the same reason lots of places define daylight hours in their traffic code as extending from before sunrise past sunset - you make sure that the line isn't in a gray area.
Anyway, the real bodycount is all those people at .15 and above.
Houston cops did that for a bit. Then they arrested people over 0.08 for DIP. Lesson learned: never trust a cop.
Oh no. So inconvenient! God forbid that, upon leaving a bar, a cop should ask you a few questions before allowing you to get behind the wheel. OHNOES!
Yeah, pretty much. Where does a cop get off detaining me without due cause? If you don't like the 4th ammendment, go to the UK or something.
It's just your single minded little brain that seems to insist that *any* questioning of bar patrons by cops in order to determine level of intoxication somehow equates to "harassment".
It does. If you're having trouble walking properly and carrying keys, then sure, a cop can stop you (and call a cab), but if you're just coming out of a bar, then he can sod off.
To me, the gateway theory is just that... a theory.
No, it's an assertion. Theories have some evidence backing them up, and all I've ever heard is some cop running his mouth off.
There is a biological basis - if you block the receptors, you will go through withdrawal. However, pot takes so long to filter out that it just doesn't matter.
I thought the culture at MIT was that if you weren't getting straight As, then you're dogshit, but hey what do I know (3.3 RPI)
Damn straight: I'm entitled too. I'm entitled to a fair shake, and what I see is the boomers doing their best to take the ladder they climbed and pull it up after them. I also see that our wealth imbalance is way out of whack: CEOs make millions per year, while the jobs that paid $100k in 1995 pay $110k today even though things are 50% more expensive. From what data I've found, wages have stagnated as long as I've been alive - this isn't fair and it's only going to lead to trouble.
He can sneer all he wants - but if there is a slot he needs to fill - today - the cert gives you an edge.
Not anywhere I've ever been
He can't interview them all. He may have the time to look at the best two out of three.
Or he'll ask his devs for recommendations - hello networking!