Typical naivete. Organized crime didn't disappear with the end of prohibition.
Correct. It shifted from the newly-legal industry of alcohol to the still-illegal opiates and marijuana and heavily-restricted (and illegal in most places) gambling industries.
Fighting drug use moves the death and hardship from the user to law enforcement and innocent people caught in the crossfire. The genie is out of the bottle. People are going to die-- we get to say whether it is those who are responsible for their own actions, or people trying to help.
You'd think the people who are for prohibition based on the deaths and illness caused by illegal drugs, would realize that shifting the deaths from the people who are responsible for their own fate onto the peaceful people caught in the crossfire is not a superior outcome.
The results of the drug prohibition experiment, from the worldwide laboratory, prove that government meddling in the human right to self-determination results in evil.
OK, Captain Logical Fallacy-- perhaps we subsidize nuclear power generation for the same reasons we subsidize other forms of power generation. That is the implication.
This mandate will force them to be installed in the vehicles that need them the LEAST. Your RV won't have one. A rig won't have one. Delivery trucks won't have one.
How about costing millions a year for 12-15 theoretical deaths? That's assuming people USE the backup camera. After all, don't we already have THREE MIRRORS? There are few investments with such a poor return.
How about all the deaths caused by people driving old, worn-out cars without proven safety features like air bags because they can't afford expensive new cars with mandatory cameras?
How about wanting a simple, well-organized instrument cluster, but instead you have a big LCD screen in the middle that's useless except for the.1% of the time you're backing up? Because it's not like the auto makers are going to throw in touch-screen climate controls and entertainment systems for free. Instead, your conventional controls are going to be squeezed into an inconvenient area with tiny controls you can't reach, so when you try to shut off the radio you rear-end someone.
Do I like safety gadgets? YES! Do I like mandating dubious, expensive ones that can CAUSE injuries? No.
Ok, you say Google isn't a monopoly, so what about Microsoft in the late 90s. What if they implemented a filter in IE that stopped those words from being displayed for the same reasons.
We had a big case in the courts regarding whether Microsoft was a monopoly of not. You may have heard of it...
Yes, it may not be a first amendment issue, but it is a valid issue nevertheless.
If it's not a first amendment issue, then it doesn't belong in a discussion regarding free speech.
In fact, for the last three years, my wife has had a particular "birth control" prescribed to her purely as a method to keep her hormones balanced properly
This is not the use that people are complaining about. They are talking about ELECTIVE USE OF ABORTION DRUGS AND BIRTH CONTROL. Obviously, not everyone between 18 and 80 uses birth control for hormone control or else, gee, around 50% of the population would be pointing it out.
The point of impact of the gun's stock is much larger than the bullet. A heavier gun has less kick than a lighter gun, but a stock with a larger surface area (contacting the shoulder) also has less kick.
Slashdot Mirror
When are the laws against polygamy going to be struck down?
Indeed. Didn't our president say in 2008 that he opposed legalizing gay marriage? When is he going to step down?
Maybe it's not OK to apply zero-tolerance politics to divisive issues.
Do Africans have compound eyes like flies?
Or just sound like KITT, which would be totally boss.
Could be worse. Imagine if they had purchased Ion Storm. Your assistant could be Superfly Johnson. CAN'T LEAVE WITHOUT YOUR BUDDY SUPERFLY!
Correct. It shifted from the newly-legal industry of alcohol to the still-illegal opiates and marijuana and heavily-restricted (and illegal in most places) gambling industries.
Fighting drug use moves the death and hardship from the user to law enforcement and innocent people caught in the crossfire. The genie is out of the bottle. People are going to die-- we get to say whether it is those who are responsible for their own actions, or people trying to help.
You'd think the people who are for prohibition based on the deaths and illness caused by illegal drugs, would realize that shifting the deaths from the people who are responsible for their own fate onto the peaceful people caught in the crossfire is not a superior outcome.
The results of the drug prohibition experiment, from the worldwide laboratory, prove that government meddling in the human right to self-determination results in evil.
The problem there isn't the Michigan Left, but a driver who should not have been driving.
I'd say, at the point where you started $5,000 short and then assumed that tuition wouldn't go up.
OK, Captain Logical Fallacy-- perhaps we subsidize nuclear power generation for the same reasons we subsidize other forms of power generation. That is the implication.
Try yoga.
Hundreds? You wish. And I'm sure it will be a mandatory part of the safety inspection in most of the coastal states within a year.
So... both "think of the children" and zero-tolerance "if it saves one life, it's worth it"?
Are all testers white?
Are only white testers prejudiced?
This mandate will force them to be installed in the vehicles that need them the LEAST. Your RV won't have one. A rig won't have one. Delivery trucks won't have one.
How about costing millions a year for 12-15 theoretical deaths? That's assuming people USE the backup camera. After all, don't we already have THREE MIRRORS? There are few investments with such a poor return.
How about all the deaths caused by people driving old, worn-out cars without proven safety features like air bags because they can't afford expensive new cars with mandatory cameras?
How about wanting a simple, well-organized instrument cluster, but instead you have a big LCD screen in the middle that's useless except for the .1% of the time you're backing up? Because it's not like the auto makers are going to throw in touch-screen climate controls and entertainment systems for free. Instead, your conventional controls are going to be squeezed into an inconvenient area with tiny controls you can't reach, so when you try to shut off the radio you rear-end someone.
Do I like safety gadgets? YES! Do I like mandating dubious, expensive ones that can CAUSE injuries? No.
We had a big case in the courts regarding whether Microsoft was a monopoly of not. You may have heard of it...
If it's not a first amendment issue, then it doesn't belong in a discussion regarding free speech.
This is not the use that people are complaining about. They are talking about ELECTIVE USE OF ABORTION DRUGS AND BIRTH CONTROL. Obviously, not everyone between 18 and 80 uses birth control for hormone control or else, gee, around 50% of the population would be pointing it out.
HEY! That's my IP address!
Ask Hannibal.
The point of impact of the gun's stock is much larger than the bullet. A heavier gun has less kick than a lighter gun, but a stock with a larger surface area (contacting the shoulder) also has less kick.
Sounds like Piers Anthony's Macroscope... they turned themselves into goo before heading out.
Well, why didn't you pick me up on the way, you bastard!
Golf carts have batteries.
Teslas have batteries.
Coincidence?