It's a good lesson. Everything we do has consequences. Make sure, when you shit on someone, that they have something to lose. Because, if they have nothing to lose, they may decide to take you down with 'em.
And if you want some Machiavelli thrown in for good measure, here ya go:
If you must hurt someone, hurt them in such a way that they cannot retaliate, ever.
Trains don't usually travel 300 mph in heavily populated areas, exactly because of the possibility of derailment. But there are vast stretches of empty space between cities where they could easily go that fast and threaten no more people than would be threatened flying in a plane.
You can take them to court, but seeing as how they are a giant corporation, they are mostly immune to attack from anyone lower than a medium sized corporation.
Part of the reason there's so much violence in the drug trade is because there is no legal remedy if somebody cheats you, so many will resort to violence. Several will even pre-emptively use violence because they just assume they'll get cheated, so you might as well cheat and/or kill them first.
If drugs were legal and somebody sold you a bad batch, or didn't deliver, you could take them to court.
If it was really about creating equality, why would you blow yourself up? You end up dead, not with more wealth. You also bring down the wrath of those you blew up on the innocent people for whom you are supposedly fighting.
He didn't say that they are doing it to create equality, he said that's how we cure it. They're doing it because they're desperate and angry, and desperate and angry people do very foolish things.
As long as they don't question you, it doesn't matter if they read you your rights or not. If they DO question you without Mirandizing you, then whatever you say is not admissible.
This is why the people who are promoting Solar Cooking are doing so in third world countries. Solar cooking means they don't have to spend so much time looking for firewood, and they can keep their trees. Plus, it helps stave off global warming a little bit.
Yeah... if you think the Diebold problem is bad now, just wait until they try something like this.
The way they prevented election fraud in the past (prior to paperless electronic voting) was to have volunteers from all parties examine the process at every single step, in every single location where voting took place. They were there when the votes were cast, they were there when the votes were transported, they were there when the votes were counted. They examined the box where the votes were placed to make sure that it was empty and that there were no secret compartments.
It's a monumental task that takes tons of manpower, and it's only done every two years on the federal level.
Just think of the bureaucracy that would have to be in place if this were done every single day, from every voter's home. I don't think it would even be possible to prevent fraud in that case.
You people can do whatever you want to screw us over and we can't LEGALLY do a thing about it.
Fixed that for ya.
And even that's not technically true. You can volunteer to campaign for a candidate you support, doing things like stuffing envelopes, going door to door, making phone calls, etc. All these things are highly irritating, but they work. You can stage protests, though those are largely ineffective without at least a hundred thousand people showing up.
Voting isn't the only thing that can be done - you can convince other people to vote.
I'm the GPP, and I wasn't seriously suggesting that people would stop driving their cars and start using public transit. Though if they were going someplace where they didn't want people knowing they were going there, they might use it on that occassion (if it were available).
I know. Even I don't ride it despite the fact that the bus goes straight to the front door of my workplace, because it would turn my daily round-trip commute from a 1 hour a day ordeal into a 3 hour a day ordeal, with about 4 transfers each way.
On the plus side, this might just encourage more people to take public transit. All this system would see would be your car going back and forth between your home (if you don't have a garage) and the closest park and ride station. Or, if you're close enough, you could just take the bus into the main arteries of the transit system.
Incidentally, this would be how criminals would stay off the radar.
Yeah, but you know how much it costs just to get to court? And how little the type of person companies typically pull this stuff on can afford it? (Hint: plenty of fast food places call all their workers "managers")
It's just word games, like the whole Blockbuster thing with "No Late Fees", but there's a fee for turning in movies late. You don't actually have to manage anybody to be a "manager" (read: exempt from overtime).
Slashdot Mirror
If you must hurt someone, hurt them in such a way that they cannot retaliate, ever.
Ah, isn't it wonderful that the way to avoid being a victim in public school is the same way you avoid being a victim in prison?
I challenge you to try and ride a motorcycle from the UK to the US.
Trains don't usually travel 300 mph in heavily populated areas, exactly because of the possibility of derailment. But there are vast stretches of empty space between cities where they could easily go that fast and threaten no more people than would be threatened flying in a plane.
You can take them to court, but seeing as how they are a giant corporation, they are mostly immune to attack from anyone lower than a medium sized corporation.
Part of the reason there's so much violence in the drug trade is because there is no legal remedy if somebody cheats you, so many will resort to violence. Several will even pre-emptively use violence because they just assume they'll get cheated, so you might as well cheat and/or kill them first.
If drugs were legal and somebody sold you a bad batch, or didn't deliver, you could take them to court.
Quiet you, or that damn balloon will come again!
Yes, but that's not what you said. What you said was this:
"Cops on duty should not have any right to privacy."
So, again I ask - what about cops who are working (on duty) undercover?
As long as they don't question you, it doesn't matter if they read you your rights or not. If they DO question you without Mirandizing you, then whatever you say is not admissible.
So... what about cops that are undercover?
This is why the people who are promoting Solar Cooking are doing so in third world countries. Solar cooking means they don't have to spend so much time looking for firewood, and they can keep their trees. Plus, it helps stave off global warming a little bit.
I used to, but then they went and redid all the districts (I'm in Texas).
I do know both of my senators though (Coryn and Hutchison).
Yeah... if you think the Diebold problem is bad now, just wait until they try something like this.
The way they prevented election fraud in the past (prior to paperless electronic voting) was to have volunteers from all parties examine the process at every single step, in every single location where voting took place. They were there when the votes were cast, they were there when the votes were transported, they were there when the votes were counted. They examined the box where the votes were placed to make sure that it was empty and that there were no secret compartments.
It's a monumental task that takes tons of manpower, and it's only done every two years on the federal level.
Just think of the bureaucracy that would have to be in place if this were done every single day, from every voter's home. I don't think it would even be possible to prevent fraud in that case.
"Hey honey! The phone's coughing again!"
I'm the GPP, and I wasn't seriously suggesting that people would stop driving their cars and start using public transit. Though if they were going someplace where they didn't want people knowing they were going there, they might use it on that occassion (if it were available).
I know. Even I don't ride it despite the fact that the bus goes straight to the front door of my workplace, because it would turn my daily round-trip commute from a 1 hour a day ordeal into a 3 hour a day ordeal, with about 4 transfers each way.
On the plus side, this might just encourage more people to take public transit. All this system would see would be your car going back and forth between your home (if you don't have a garage) and the closest park and ride station. Or, if you're close enough, you could just take the bus into the main arteries of the transit system.
Incidentally, this would be how criminals would stay off the radar.
Yes, because women don't have affairs or commit crimes...
Yeah, but you know how much it costs just to get to court? And how little the type of person companies typically pull this stuff on can afford it? (Hint: plenty of fast food places call all their workers "managers")
It's just word games, like the whole Blockbuster thing with "No Late Fees", but there's a fee for turning in movies late. You don't actually have to manage anybody to be a "manager" (read: exempt from overtime).