1. There's lots of evidence that high levels of inequality make everyone's lives poorer, including the rich. Crime is higher if there are lots of poor people (and naturally lots of it is aimed at the rich), pollution, all sorts of things.
2. You call that a strong antigun reference? They suggested that violence in the US tends to be more lethal because there are lots of easily accessible guns around. That's in the *summary*. Switzerland has lots of guns but everyone is trained, as part of military service, to use and store them correctly.
3. Biased much? That's not an anti-individual statement. It's suggesting that some of the choices you've made, in many cases more extreme than any other western nation, have negative consequences for health. No value judgement about the cost/benefit at all.
It's always amazing how some people come up with questions like yours, usually alluding to some kind of slippery slope argument, as if their home/town/state/country were the only one in the world and nobody anywhere else had taken a different approach.
Guns? Gun control is simply unworkable! If it were, the government would soon be a dictatorship! Never mind all the other countries with varying levels of gun control and decidedly democratic governments.
Public health care? Death panels! Spiralling costs! Never mind all the other places in the world with public health care that's cheaper than private in the US and not a death panel in sight.
To answer your questions:
1. "Are we going to outlaw everything that person A can use to kill person B?" - no, very few places if any have tried that. It's not practical. Guns however, particularly small, concealable ones, are extra dangerous because killing with them takes a very short time and very little effort. A hothead who might think twice about stabbing someone multiple times to kill them using that knife in his pocket (in some places, including Texas, knives are arguably more heavily regulated than guns, BTW), might just take a shot at someone. He's also less likely to hurt a bystander using a knife than a gun. People, particularly children, are much less likely to accidentally kill themselves using knives than guns. (Male) suicides are also less likely without easy availability of a gun.
2. "Are we going to make files and drills illegal because they could be used to manufacture guns?" - That turns out not to be necessary. If a person really wants an unlicensed gun, he will make, steal, smuggle or otherwise acquire one. But the vast majority of people won't. And if someone is using a gun in a non-permitted way, such as carrying it around in a city, the cops can take it away.
3. "What's going to happen with 3D printers?" - See 2. They're trendy Slashdot gadget-porn, but a 3D printer is just an inferior version of a metal shop with a shallower learning curve.
4. "And if government can throw people in jail for something as silly as merely carrying a piece of metal that's shaped a particular way, what are the arguments against government controlling how we have sex or whether women can have abortions" - Lots of places with stricter gun control laws than the US, especially particular US states, have much LESS interference by the government in sex and reproduction.
5. "Control of what we see, record, eat and get high on already seems to be considered normal by everybody." - Again, it's quite possible to find jurisdictions with strong gun control laws and very little interference with media, none of the silly issues with public photography or videography, food, or drugs that are seen in the US.
Where I live you can get a rifle permit with a bit of training and a background check. You can get a handgun permit with more training and a few more hoops to jump through. You can't carry either one down the street, concealed or otherwise. Yet the government doesn't tell you how to have sex, when you can get an abortion, I've seen people walk past the cops on the street smoking joints with nobody batting an eye (although the cops did make them dump their beers), and it's quite legal and unrestricted to own all manner of files, drills and 3D printers.
They don't kill very many people. They just get the publicity.
Plus many of those psychos (whoops, forgot to tell you an s was coming!) aren't using their own guns. If you're held criminally responsible for your ammo and guns you'll be a lot more careful about securing them.
If I worked in a place with lots of catwalks, I might blame the lack of railings for workplace accidents. I do live in a place with lots of snow and ice. I blame the snow and ice for many traffic accidents. Inanimate objects (or their lack) can be dangerous. In places where there are fewer guns, there are generally fewer gun deaths, and fewer crime fatalities overall.
You're right though, the real problem is that Americans have the right to own and carry a gun. That leads to both a lot of guns and a complacent attitude about them. Owning, carrying and using a gun is a responsibility, and a serious one. That responsibility includes making sure you're trained to use (and not use) the gun, and making absolutely sure that nobody else has access to it.
There also seems to be the belief that Joe Random should be carrying a gun around and shooting down criminals if he sees them. Police are (or should be) extensively trained in when and how to use deadly force. Joe Random isn't.
If Imperial units were ALL related by A factor, such as 12 or 16, you might have a point. The problem is, they're not. 12 inches in a foot, three feet in a yard, 1760 yards in a mile. Never mind that Americans seem to use yards for football and that's it, so you have to remember five thousand and some odd feet in a mile. Then there are things like fluid ounces.
I have. If a bunch of guys intimidating him into not driving, or stealing his keys doesn't work, the cops it is. So long as they get there before drunky manages to do any driving they'll generally give him a lift home and a lecture.
If my friends or family members were suicidal I'd intervene too.
He was arrested because police matched his car to damage caused to other cars after they received a tip. The fact that the tipster knew about the crime because the criminal was bragging of Facebook is immaterial. It could have been in a bar, or in the locker room.
Not that he wasn't charged with drunk driving... apparently the cops didn't think the Facebook confession was enough evidence. It looks like he was only charged with what regular old fashioned police work could pin on him.
Why does everything have to be "part of who you are!!!"
My wisdom teeth were part of me. I'm glad they're not anymore. An epileptic's seizures are part of who he is. Most are pretty happy when they're suppressed.
The real question is, is being cured of addiction worth not being able to feel pleasure anymore, especially if its the only option? If that's actually what the surgery does. This IS slashdot.
I'm not sure comparing your murder rate with Honduras means you're doing okay. The US intentional homicide rate is essentially the same as Turkmenistan and Yemen. It's around 25% worse than Cambodia and Iran. It's more than two and a half times worse than Canada, three and a half times worse than the UK and more than four times worse than Australia.
The 20 kids killed at that elementary school is something like eight hours worth of US gun deaths. It's usually not 20 at a time at a school, and it's often not children, but a lot of people get killed in the US by guns.
Lots of inanimate objects, from cliffs to discarded banana peels, are risks. Why do people say such silly things when the topic of guns comes up?
Guns are specifically made to be dangerous. If properly stored (i.e. unloaded to make them as safe as possible and locked up so they're not accessible) the danger is significantly mitigated (just like picking up that banana peel and tossing it in the garbage). If kept strictly under the control of a trained, careful person, the danger is controlled (like having a ranger at the cliff to shoo away idiots).
Assuming a density approximately that of Earth, the surface gravity would be about 1.6 g. As the mass goes up the radius goes up too, so surface gravity doesn't scale linearly with mass.
An Earth-like planet orbiting Tau Ceti could be examined telescopically in fair detail. If it's confirmed, it would be a great target for one of the extrasolar planetary imaging telescopes people are starting to design. It might even be possible, with refinement of current techniques, to get a rough spectrum from it with current telescopes.
A planet with four times Earth's mass but the same density would have a surface gravity of about 1.6g. Not so different. There are lots of people balancing 1.6 times my mass on similar sized feet.
"In my experience some ancient scriptures describe discoverably real aspects of life that modern experts are mostly ignorant of."
Got some examples? I'm serious... curious whether you're referring to miracles and such or some of the philosophically valuable material. If the latter, I probably disagree that modern experts are ignorant of it, but agree that what passes as an "expert" currently may well be.
Slashdot Mirror
1. There's lots of evidence that high levels of inequality make everyone's lives poorer, including the rich. Crime is higher if there are lots of poor people (and naturally lots of it is aimed at the rich), pollution, all sorts of things.
2. You call that a strong antigun reference? They suggested that violence in the US tends to be more lethal because there are lots of easily accessible guns around. That's in the *summary*. Switzerland has lots of guns but everyone is trained, as part of military service, to use and store them correctly.
3. Biased much? That's not an anti-individual statement. It's suggesting that some of the choices you've made, in many cases more extreme than any other western nation, have negative consequences for health. No value judgement about the cost/benefit at all.
I seem to recall Japan has a decent sized population. But keep coming up with excuses. That will fix the problem.
So you work yourselves to death for $7.25/hr and a debt load that is rapidly approaching where Greece got in trouble? Sounds great!
It's always amazing how some people come up with questions like yours, usually alluding to some kind of slippery slope argument, as if their home/town/state/country were the only one in the world and nobody anywhere else had taken a different approach.
Guns? Gun control is simply unworkable! If it were, the government would soon be a dictatorship! Never mind all the other countries with varying levels of gun control and decidedly democratic governments.
Public health care? Death panels! Spiralling costs! Never mind all the other places in the world with public health care that's cheaper than private in the US and not a death panel in sight.
To answer your questions:
1. "Are we going to outlaw everything that person A can use to kill person B?" - no, very few places if any have tried that. It's not practical. Guns however, particularly small, concealable ones, are extra dangerous because killing with them takes a very short time and very little effort. A hothead who might think twice about stabbing someone multiple times to kill them using that knife in his pocket (in some places, including Texas, knives are arguably more heavily regulated than guns, BTW), might just take a shot at someone. He's also less likely to hurt a bystander using a knife than a gun. People, particularly children, are much less likely to accidentally kill themselves using knives than guns. (Male) suicides are also less likely without easy availability of a gun.
2. "Are we going to make files and drills illegal because they could be used to manufacture guns?" - That turns out not to be necessary. If a person really wants an unlicensed gun, he will make, steal, smuggle or otherwise acquire one. But the vast majority of people won't. And if someone is using a gun in a non-permitted way, such as carrying it around in a city, the cops can take it away.
3. "What's going to happen with 3D printers?" - See 2. They're trendy Slashdot gadget-porn, but a 3D printer is just an inferior version of a metal shop with a shallower learning curve.
4. "And if government can throw people in jail for something as silly as merely carrying a piece of metal that's shaped a particular way, what are the arguments against government controlling how we have sex or whether women can have abortions" - Lots of places with stricter gun control laws than the US, especially particular US states, have much LESS interference by the government in sex and reproduction.
5. "Control of what we see, record, eat and get high on already seems to be considered normal by everybody." - Again, it's quite possible to find jurisdictions with strong gun control laws and very little interference with media, none of the silly issues with public photography or videography, food, or drugs that are seen in the US.
Where I live you can get a rifle permit with a bit of training and a background check. You can get a handgun permit with more training and a few more hoops to jump through. You can't carry either one down the street, concealed or otherwise. Yet the government doesn't tell you how to have sex, when you can get an abortion, I've seen people walk past the cops on the street smoking joints with nobody batting an eye (although the cops did make them dump their beers), and it's quite legal and unrestricted to own all manner of files, drills and 3D printers.
They don't kill very many people. They just get the publicity.
Plus many of those psychos (whoops, forgot to tell you an s was coming!) aren't using their own guns. If you're held criminally responsible for your ammo and guns you'll be a lot more careful about securing them.
If I worked in a place with lots of catwalks, I might blame the lack of railings for workplace accidents. I do live in a place with lots of snow and ice. I blame the snow and ice for many traffic accidents. Inanimate objects (or their lack) can be dangerous. In places where there are fewer guns, there are generally fewer gun deaths, and fewer crime fatalities overall.
You're right though, the real problem is that Americans have the right to own and carry a gun. That leads to both a lot of guns and a complacent attitude about them. Owning, carrying and using a gun is a responsibility, and a serious one. That responsibility includes making sure you're trained to use (and not use) the gun, and making absolutely sure that nobody else has access to it.
There also seems to be the belief that Joe Random should be carrying a gun around and shooting down criminals if he sees them. Police are (or should be) extensively trained in when and how to use deadly force. Joe Random isn't.
That's why it's called an opinion piece. Most opinions are stupid.
Because they're entertaining. Most of the really rich and famous people are entertainers in one way or another.
Not having to have two sets of wrenches and not crashing landers into Mars come to mind.
If Imperial units were ALL related by A factor, such as 12 or 16, you might have a point. The problem is, they're not. 12 inches in a foot, three feet in a yard, 1760 yards in a mile. Never mind that Americans seem to use yards for football and that's it, so you have to remember five thousand and some odd feet in a mile. Then there are things like fluid ounces.
I have. If a bunch of guys intimidating him into not driving, or stealing his keys doesn't work, the cops it is. So long as they get there before drunky manages to do any driving they'll generally give him a lift home and a lecture.
If my friends or family members were suicidal I'd intervene too.
He was arrested because police matched his car to damage caused to other cars after they received a tip. The fact that the tipster knew about the crime because the criminal was bragging of Facebook is immaterial. It could have been in a bar, or in the locker room.
Not that he wasn't charged with drunk driving... apparently the cops didn't think the Facebook confession was enough evidence. It looks like he was only charged with what regular old fashioned police work could pin on him.
His argument is that you shouldn't trust an unknown router OR unencrypted wireless. Encrypted wireless just gives you a false sense of security.
The solution to the problems you mentioned is to phase out unencrypted passwords. In the meantime, use end to end encryption.
Why does everything have to be "part of who you are!!!"
My wisdom teeth were part of me. I'm glad they're not anymore. An epileptic's seizures are part of who he is. Most are pretty happy when they're suppressed.
The real question is, is being cured of addiction worth not being able to feel pleasure anymore, especially if its the only option? If that's actually what the surgery does. This IS slashdot.
I'm not sure comparing your murder rate with Honduras means you're doing okay. The US intentional homicide rate is essentially the same as Turkmenistan and Yemen. It's around 25% worse than Cambodia and Iran. It's more than two and a half times worse than Canada, three and a half times worse than the UK and more than four times worse than Australia.
Some people consider protecting the mentally ill worthwhile as well. And self defence... like the pizza guy who shot a customer who punched him?
The gun violence stats aren't perfect, but they do illustrate a problem.
The 20 kids killed at that elementary school is something like eight hours worth of US gun deaths. It's usually not 20 at a time at a school, and it's often not children, but a lot of people get killed in the US by guns.
http://ss.utpb.edu/media/files/university-police/TEXAS-WEAPON-LAWS.pdf
Looks like swords and some other knives are regulated at least as much as some guns, at least in Texas (the only state I looked up).
What if you mount a gun on it? Then it becomes an "arm" doesn't it?
Lots of inanimate objects, from cliffs to discarded banana peels, are risks. Why do people say such silly things when the topic of guns comes up?
Guns are specifically made to be dangerous. If properly stored (i.e. unloaded to make them as safe as possible and locked up so they're not accessible) the danger is significantly mitigated (just like picking up that banana peel and tossing it in the garbage). If kept strictly under the control of a trained, careful person, the danger is controlled (like having a ranger at the cliff to shoo away idiots).
People with serious communicable diseases ARE controlled, as much as is practical: http://www.cdc.gov/quarantine/AboutLawsRegulationsQuarantineIsolation.html
Assuming a density approximately that of Earth, the surface gravity would be about 1.6 g. As the mass goes up the radius goes up too, so surface gravity doesn't scale linearly with mass.
An Earth-like planet orbiting Tau Ceti could be examined telescopically in fair detail. If it's confirmed, it would be a great target for one of the extrasolar planetary imaging telescopes people are starting to design. It might even be possible, with refinement of current techniques, to get a rough spectrum from it with current telescopes.
A planet with four times Earth's mass but the same density would have a surface gravity of about 1.6g. Not so different. There are lots of people balancing 1.6 times my mass on similar sized feet.
If you want to go there. "Just" 12 light years is a lot better than 100 or 1000 if you want to look.
"In my experience some ancient scriptures describe discoverably real aspects of life that modern experts are mostly ignorant of."
Got some examples? I'm serious... curious whether you're referring to miracles and such or some of the philosophically valuable material. If the latter, I probably disagree that modern experts are ignorant of it, but agree that what passes as an "expert" currently may well be.