All it needs to do is save one innocent life and it'll be worth it.
So why can't we use the same argument when it comes to stopping illegal immigrants?
How about lowering the speed limit to 55 nation-wide?
We could also use this as a justification for repealing the 4th amendment while we are at it. Let cops pull people over on a hunch. After all, if it saves one innocent life, it'll be worth it.
By the way, it is ALREADY ILLEGAL to hunt humans. That is called "murder" and can result in the 2nd most severe punishment of any crime (only copyright violation gets harsher punishments).
But of course making it MORE illegal will surely work.
And with the endgame involving a free, non-polluting resource, tons of jobs
This is EASILY accomplished. You need a large population and a lot of stationary bicycles hooked up to small generators. Yeah, you would need a LOT of people spinning away, but more jobs!
Seriously, making energy with FEWER jobs is kind of the actual goal. If more jobs is a good thing, then my solution works great.
One of the advantages of the Pi is that you have a HUGE ecosystem around it. If you have a question, the odds are that somebody else has had the same one. The distros are updated fairly often, and you can get custom distros to do one specific thing (like retro emulation or media center, for example).
The problem with any non-Pi single-board computer is the lack of support.
The C-2 looks cool, but Ubuntu 16.04 (almost two years old) is the latest Linux supported. Want android? Android 5.1 (over three years old). The Ubuntu is one of the LTS versions, but we are due for a new LTS next month. Will that be ported? Who knows?
The two other Odroid boards (XU4, more powerful, C1+, less powerful) look even worse! Ubuntu 15.04 (almost three years old, and NOT an LTS version). Android 4.4 (over four years old).
If having a more recent version of your OS of choice is important, then it is hard to beat the Pi.
there's dozens of viable competitors to YouTube out there
Where?
I tried looking, and the closest semi-popular ones that I could find were DailyMotion and Vimeo, Unfortunately, neither one seems to have a great deal of content. I like retro tech and photography vids. Not a huge amount to choose from.
Also, a lot of people earn MONEY from YouTube, and people make a living off of their videos. If you can't monetize, you probably can't afford to make the videos. AFAIK, neither DailyMotion or Vimeo pays money for ads. For Vimeo, they want the content producers to pay instead of being paid.
So, I am the one "immersed in the fear culture" but you are the one so terrified of guns that the thought of being near a loaded one makes you pee your panties. Riiiiight.
I really don't care what lies you have to tell yourself to justify your position. Just don't lie to me. Have a great day. I am done.
One final bit of information. Concealed carry permit holders are MORE HONEST than the average person -- by far.
The methodology was to look at the states that publish this data (admittedly not a lot), but if they say how many concealed carry permits are revoked for committing a crime, you just divide that by the total number of permits in that state. That is pretty unambiguous and not subject to skewing the numbers.
Yeah, it could also be that the concealed carry permit holders are NOT more honest, but just smarter than average and just don't get caught (but not terribly likely). Pick your interpretation.
Well, you forget one small thing about the.30-06. Hunting (aka hollow-point) rounds are VERY common. Those expand and do a LOT more damage. So, yeah, I would still go with the 5.56 for being less lethal.
So, you want the victims unarmed? Yeah, that makes them much safer for sure. Guns are used to PREVENT crime much more often that you think. A friend of mine had to pull his gun out for times so far. Each time, demonstrating that he was armed was enough to cause the attackers to flee, no shots fired, nobody hurt. But I am sure that you will pretend that this doesn't happen.
Guns have become more accurate, lower recoil, and easier to use.
Some truth in what you say, but let's look further.
More accurate. Some truth, but a lot of that is optics. However, the typical "mass shooting" distance is a few feet, so that is not really an issue. Even with the Las Vegas shooting, they guy was shooting at a giant crowd, so accuracy was not really the issue -- just aim for the middle of the crowd.
Lower recoil. Yes, but by using WEAKER BULLETS. The stock AR-15 is not legal to hunt deer with in my state because it TOO WEAK. Do you think we would be better off going back to the days of more powerful ammo?
Easier to use? Hmmmm. The AR-15 has the usual assortment of magazine release, safety, bolt release buttons as any other rifle. Plus, it has a SEPARATE bolt handle and forward assist. I would call that MORE COMPLICATED than many other rifles. If you get a failure to feed on an AR, it is less obvious how to clear it So, for the AR-15, no. Not true at all. Now for pistols, you have a point. The Glock has no safety.
So, is it your belief that having a single safety lever has confused many would-be mass shooters because they could not figure out how to get the pistol to fire?
I'm OK with using taxes to fund social programs to reduce poverty too.
It seems like there is a group of people that want mass shootings to happen and will fight anything that will reduce them.
First, wouldn't it be better to have a stronger economy so that the poor could just get jobs instead of having to rely on social programs? That way they can pull themselves out of poverty and get the satisfaction of doing it themselves rather than relying on the government.
I have not seen ANYBODY that wants mass shootings to happen. Everybody wants to stop mass shootings. However, the approaches differ:
One group wants to reduce the rights of everybody in the hopes that the criminal might have a harder time getting a gun.
The other groups knows that reducing the rights of an honest person does not make them safer. They want the victims to at least have a chance to fight back, and having armed victims might very well deter the criminal. Plus, other weapons exist. Our WORST mass shooting in the US pales in comparison to the Nice, France attack that killed 86 -- with a truck. Some people realise that 17 dead with a gun is not worse than 17 dead with a bomb or a knife or a truck.
But I dare you to show me ONE sane person that does not want to stop any sort of mass murder.
Thanks for the link to wounding patterns. However, if I were told that I were going to be shot and I got to choose any common rifle, I would prefer to be shot with an AR-15. That is because it uses one of the WEAKEST of any center-fire bullets.
Case in point. I live in Colorado. The standard 5.56 AR-15 is ILLEGAL to use for deer hunting because it is not powerful enough. Yes, there are ways to modify the AR-15 to use different ammo to make it legal for use on larger game, but that is not terribly common.
Want proof? The Washington DC sniper used an AR-15 and there were survivors. If he had used a standard deer rifle, there would be no survivors. Pulse nightclub in Orlando -- more than half of those shot survived.
Now, back in WW2, the.30-06 cartridge was the most popular. That is perfectly capable of taking any North American large game. Any human shot with one of those in the torso is almost certainly not going to survive,
One of the main reasons for the AR-15 using such a weak bullet is that it is also lighter to carry. If you are marching for days, a lighter bullet means the difference between carrying 100 rounds of.30-06 and 400 rounds of 5.56. Since running out is a very bad idea in a war, they figured that more bullets are better, even if they are only marginally effective.
But yeah, let's ban the AR-15 to force criminals to use a more powerful gun. What could go wrong?
No, you find people who don't want their karma shot to hell because people will mod them down just because they don't agree with what they have to say.
I have seen this myself first hand. If you aren't part of the political group-think, you are modded into oblivion.
Poverty causes violence. Google the phrase "Chicago crime gap." The cliff notes version is that some Chicago zip codes have dozens of shootings per year, and some have none. The gun laws are the same. The difference is the average income in those zip codes. People with money don't usually go around shooting each other. Poor people seem to do so much more often.
But as to access to guns, just look to history for a negative example. Back a few decades ago you could MAIL ORDER guns without a background check. You could get a Browning Hi Power 9mm pistol (invented in the 1920's) with a 13 round magazine delivered right to your door. Add in four extra magazines and two boxes of ammo, and you have 65 rounds of death that fits in your pockets.
But back in the 50's you didn't have random shootings. It isn't the guns that have changed (other than a little plastic, they haven't), but the culture has changed.
I am sure that violent video games and movies do little to NORMAL people, but might be enough to push mentally ill people over the edge.
Russia could have interfered in the elections in a way that the Democrats would approve of. Just put a million Russians on boats and send them to California. California would have been happy to let them vote. Then, the Russians get back on the boats and go home.
Well, there is a correlation between guns and shootings. No guns, no shootings. In other, more civilized countries, their mass murderers use bombs, trucks, and knives. We need our dead killed by other weapons. You can go to a funeral of a stabbing victim and just see the joy on the faces of the relatives that at least their loved one was not shot.
I think you will find that NRA members are among the ones that follow the law the most. They don't want to agree to any gun measure, no matter how sensible, because their "sense" tells them that criminals don't obey laws -- even gun laws. Let's pretend that the NRA did not exist.
Shooting.... Whoops, let's ban assault rifles. Shooting... Hey, let's ban all semi-automatic guns. Shooting... Well, maybe we should ban all handguns. Shooting... Fine, we will ban all guns. Shooting... Wait, the criminals didn't turn theirs in? I'm shocked! Shooting... OK. Time to search house to house and get them all. Truck attack... Damn. 60 people killed with a truck. What do we ban now?
Yeah, it is kind of like that. I should like to point out that a few decades ago, you could MAIL ORDER GUNS. Background checks did not exist. And yet in the 40's and 50's you did not have random shootings like you do today. No, the guns haven't changed. The "Browning Hi Power" was invented in the 1920's, and had a 13-round magazine. Yeah, you could just order one through the mail. Get for extra mags, and you have 65 rounds of hot death that fits in your pockets. But no school shootings.
So, please provide proof of your claims. How many NRA members are responsible for murders? Please provide links showing the crime and their NRA member status. I will wait.
I remember when the report about Russian meddling first came out a month or two ago.
Both Fox and CBS (the only two others that I checked) included the fact that the Russians appeared to also support Bernie. CNN, for whatever reason, chose to omit this fact.
Then there was that time when CNN reported a Trump e-mail as being from September 4th instead of September 14th, which took the story from "Illegal" to "who cares." Yes, they had to correct it, but the damage was done.
Then, there was the time that CNN had to "insert" a word into one of Trump's quotes in order to make him seem racist. Yeah, that is the height of honesty.
You are against streaming services, but you love Netflix? Yeah, that makes sense.
This is how things are likely going to work for me. When I get tired of Netflix, then I will cancel, and then get Hulu for a few months (hello, Robot Chicken). Once I watch everything that Hulu offers that I want to see, I will switch services again to the next thing. When I have gone through the entire list of providers, I will go back to Netflix and start the list again, picking up the new things since I last had them. If the media companies are going to go the way of "buy from me and nobody else" then I suspect that more and more people will go this route.
The problem is testing. To get a drug approved takes mega-bucks. However, with conventional medicines, the company has a patent on the medicine so they get a guaranteed period of income.
Kratom, however, is just a plant. It could be a wonder-cure, but nobody will pay millions for the testing because, once approved, anybody with a greenhouse could sell it for less.
Wouldn't the browser be in the perfect position to know where each image will be? I mean, the browser is the one that HAS to know, since it has to display those images.
Slashdot Mirror
So why can't we use the same argument when it comes to stopping illegal immigrants?
How about lowering the speed limit to 55 nation-wide?
We could also use this as a justification for repealing the 4th amendment while we are at it. Let cops pull people over on a hunch. After all, if it saves one innocent life, it'll be worth it.
By the way, it is ALREADY ILLEGAL to hunt humans. That is called "murder" and can result in the 2nd most severe punishment of any crime (only copyright violation gets harsher punishments).
But of course making it MORE illegal will surely work.
Don't worry. YouTube is a gun-free campus. The shooter is completely safe from his victims. Funny how it works out that way.
One of the advantages of the Pi is that you have a HUGE ecosystem around it. If you have a question, the odds are that somebody else has had the same one. The distros are updated fairly often, and you can get custom distros to do one specific thing (like retro emulation or media center, for example).
The problem with any non-Pi single-board computer is the lack of support.
The C-2 looks cool, but Ubuntu 16.04 (almost two years old) is the latest Linux supported. Want android? Android 5.1 (over three years old). The Ubuntu is one of the LTS versions, but we are due for a new LTS next month. Will that be ported? Who knows?
The two other Odroid boards (XU4, more powerful, C1+, less powerful) look even worse! Ubuntu 15.04 (almost three years old, and NOT an LTS version). Android 4.4 (over four years old).
If having a more recent version of your OS of choice is important, then it is hard to beat the Pi.
http://www.hardkernel.com/main...
Thanks.
Where?
I tried looking, and the closest semi-popular ones that I could find were DailyMotion and Vimeo, Unfortunately, neither one seems to have a great deal of content. I like retro tech and photography vids. Not a huge amount to choose from.
Also, a lot of people earn MONEY from YouTube, and people make a living off of their videos. If you can't monetize, you probably can't afford to make the videos. AFAIK, neither DailyMotion or Vimeo pays money for ads. For Vimeo, they want the content producers to pay instead of being paid.
But might be enough to swing the electoral vote a different way.
Anyways, it was a joke.
So, I am the one "immersed in the fear culture" but you are the one so terrified of guns that the thought of being near a loaded one makes you pee your panties. Riiiiight.
I really don't care what lies you have to tell yourself to justify your position. Just don't lie to me. Have a great day. I am done.
One final bit of information. Concealed carry permit holders are MORE HONEST than the average person -- by far.
The methodology was to look at the states that publish this data (admittedly not a lot), but if they say how many concealed carry permits are revoked for committing a crime, you just divide that by the total number of permits in that state. That is pretty unambiguous and not subject to skewing the numbers.
https://www.dailywire.com/news...
Yeah, it could also be that the concealed carry permit holders are NOT more honest, but just smarter than average and just don't get caught (but not terribly likely). Pick your interpretation.
But stuff like this never happens, right?
https://www.statesman.com/news...
http://www.philly.com/philly/n...
https://www.cnn.com/2015/07/01...
Well, you forget one small thing about the .30-06. Hunting (aka hollow-point) rounds are VERY common. Those expand and do a LOT more damage. So, yeah, I would still go with the 5.56 for being less lethal.
So, you want the victims unarmed? Yeah, that makes them much safer for sure. Guns are used to PREVENT crime much more often that you think. A friend of mine had to pull his gun out for times so far. Each time, demonstrating that he was armed was enough to cause the attackers to flee, no shots fired, nobody hurt. But I am sure that you will pretend that this doesn't happen.
https://www.justfactsdaily.com...
Some truth in what you say, but let's look further.
More accurate. Some truth, but a lot of that is optics. However, the typical "mass shooting" distance is a few feet, so that is not really an issue. Even with the Las Vegas shooting, they guy was shooting at a giant crowd, so accuracy was not really the issue -- just aim for the middle of the crowd.
Lower recoil. Yes, but by using WEAKER BULLETS. The stock AR-15 is not legal to hunt deer with in my state because it TOO WEAK. Do you think we would be better off going back to the days of more powerful ammo?
5.56x 45 ammo -- what is used in the standard AR-15. Around 1,700 to 1,800 J of energy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Compare that to the .30-06 (the previous "war" ammo). Around 2,800 to 2,900 J of energy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
So, which one would YOU rather be shot with?
Easier to use? Hmmmm. The AR-15 has the usual assortment of magazine release, safety, bolt release buttons as any other rifle. Plus, it has a SEPARATE bolt handle and forward assist. I would call that MORE COMPLICATED than many other rifles. If you get a failure to feed on an AR, it is less obvious how to clear it So, for the AR-15, no. Not true at all. Now for pistols, you have a point. The Glock has no safety.
So, is it your belief that having a single safety lever has confused many would-be mass shooters because they could not figure out how to get the pistol to fire?
Anonymous Coward said:
First, wouldn't it be better to have a stronger economy so that the poor could just get jobs instead of having to rely on social programs? That way they can pull themselves out of poverty and get the satisfaction of doing it themselves rather than relying on the government.
I have not seen ANYBODY that wants mass shootings to happen. Everybody wants to stop mass shootings. However, the approaches differ:
One group wants to reduce the rights of everybody in the hopes that the criminal might have a harder time getting a gun.
The other groups knows that reducing the rights of an honest person does not make them safer. They want the victims to at least have a chance to fight back, and having armed victims might very well deter the criminal. Plus, other weapons exist. Our WORST mass shooting in the US pales in comparison to the Nice, France attack that killed 86 -- with a truck. Some people realise that 17 dead with a gun is not worse than 17 dead with a bomb or a knife or a truck.
But I dare you to show me ONE sane person that does not want to stop any sort of mass murder.
Well, if we are talking about infringing on one constitutional right, why not another? As long as we are attacking freedom, let's do it big!
Thanks for the link to wounding patterns. However, if I were told that I were going to be shot and I got to choose any common rifle, I would prefer to be shot with an AR-15. That is because it uses one of the WEAKEST of any center-fire bullets.
Case in point. I live in Colorado. The standard 5.56 AR-15 is ILLEGAL to use for deer hunting because it is not powerful enough. Yes, there are ways to modify the AR-15 to use different ammo to make it legal for use on larger game, but that is not terribly common.
Want proof? The Washington DC sniper used an AR-15 and there were survivors. If he had used a standard deer rifle, there would be no survivors. Pulse nightclub in Orlando -- more than half of those shot survived.
Now, back in WW2, the .30-06 cartridge was the most popular. That is perfectly capable of taking any North American large game. Any human shot with one of those in the torso is almost certainly not going to survive,
One of the main reasons for the AR-15 using such a weak bullet is that it is also lighter to carry. If you are marching for days, a lighter bullet means the difference between carrying 100 rounds of .30-06 and 400 rounds of 5.56. Since running out is a very bad idea in a war, they figured that more bullets are better, even if they are only marginally effective.
But yeah, let's ban the AR-15 to force criminals to use a more powerful gun. What could go wrong?
No, you find people who don't want their karma shot to hell because people will mod them down just because they don't agree with what they have to say.
I have seen this myself first hand. If you aren't part of the political group-think, you are modded into oblivion.
Poverty causes violence. Google the phrase "Chicago crime gap." The cliff notes version is that some Chicago zip codes have dozens of shootings per year, and some have none. The gun laws are the same. The difference is the average income in those zip codes. People with money don't usually go around shooting each other. Poor people seem to do so much more often.
But as to access to guns, just look to history for a negative example. Back a few decades ago you could MAIL ORDER guns without a background check. You could get a Browning Hi Power 9mm pistol (invented in the 1920's) with a 13 round magazine delivered right to your door. Add in four extra magazines and two boxes of ammo, and you have 65 rounds of death that fits in your pockets.
But back in the 50's you didn't have random shootings. It isn't the guns that have changed (other than a little plastic, they haven't), but the culture has changed.
I am sure that violent video games and movies do little to NORMAL people, but might be enough to push mentally ill people over the edge.
Russia could have interfered in the elections in a way that the Democrats would approve of. Just put a million Russians on boats and send them to California. California would have been happy to let them vote. Then, the Russians get back on the boats and go home.
Well, there is a correlation between guns and shootings. No guns, no shootings. In other, more civilized countries, their mass murderers use bombs, trucks, and knives. We need our dead killed by other weapons. You can go to a funeral of a stabbing victim and just see the joy on the faces of the relatives that at least their loved one was not shot.
I think you will find that NRA members are among the ones that follow the law the most. They don't want to agree to any gun measure, no matter how sensible, because their "sense" tells them that criminals don't obey laws -- even gun laws. Let's pretend that the NRA did not exist.
Shooting....
Whoops, let's ban assault rifles.
Shooting...
Hey, let's ban all semi-automatic guns.
Shooting...
Well, maybe we should ban all handguns.
Shooting...
Fine, we will ban all guns.
Shooting...
Wait, the criminals didn't turn theirs in? I'm shocked!
Shooting...
OK. Time to search house to house and get them all.
Truck attack...
Damn. 60 people killed with a truck. What do we ban now?
Yeah, it is kind of like that. I should like to point out that a few decades ago, you could MAIL ORDER GUNS. Background checks did not exist. And yet in the 40's and 50's you did not have random shootings like you do today. No, the guns haven't changed. The "Browning Hi Power" was invented in the 1920's, and had a 13-round magazine. Yeah, you could just order one through the mail. Get for extra mags, and you have 65 rounds of hot death that fits in your pockets. But no school shootings.
So, please provide proof of your claims. How many NRA members are responsible for murders? Please provide links showing the crime and their NRA member status. I will wait.
Wow, praising CNN?
I remember when the report about Russian meddling first came out a month or two ago.
Both Fox and CBS (the only two others that I checked) included the fact that the Russians appeared to also support Bernie. CNN, for whatever reason, chose to omit this fact.
Then there was that time when CNN reported a Trump e-mail as being from September 4th instead of September 14th, which took the story from "Illegal" to "who cares." Yes, they had to correct it, but the damage was done.
http://money.cnn.com/2017/12/0...
Then, there was the time that CNN had to "insert" a word into one of Trump's quotes in order to make him seem racist. Yeah, that is the height of honesty.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballo...
But if you believe their bias, then you don't see it as a bias.
You are against streaming services, but you love Netflix? Yeah, that makes sense.
This is how things are likely going to work for me. When I get tired of Netflix, then I will cancel, and then get Hulu for a few months (hello, Robot Chicken). Once I watch everything that Hulu offers that I want to see, I will switch services again to the next thing. When I have gone through the entire list of providers, I will go back to Netflix and start the list again, picking up the new things since I last had them. If the media companies are going to go the way of "buy from me and nobody else" then I suspect that more and more people will go this route.
Not quite. Close, though.
The problem is testing. To get a drug approved takes mega-bucks. However, with conventional medicines, the company has a patent on the medicine so they get a guaranteed period of income.
Kratom, however, is just a plant. It could be a wonder-cure, but nobody will pay millions for the testing because, once approved, anybody with a greenhouse could sell it for less.
Thanks. I didn't know that. I am more of a hardware guy.
Wouldn't the browser be in the perfect position to know where each image will be? I mean, the browser is the one that HAS to know, since it has to display those images.