Are the reasons still valid, though? If the government is so despotic it needs removing, the question comes down to whether the US armed forces are going to protect the government or the citizens. If it protects the government, no amount of fat accountants & other assorted weekend warriors with no training or logistics support is going to change anything. If the armed forces protect the civilians by ousting the government, then whether the civilians are armed or not doesn't matter in the slightest.
If you'd said the 2nd amendment was valid in the time it was written, you'd be right, but clearly a lot has changed since then.
Times change, and the disparity between the firepower of the populace and the armed forces changes too. Ignoring that doesn't really help the discussion.
Well, most countries don't base their civil defense on 18th century ideas, and so they don't have these ridiculous situations to deal with. Most countries create a military, and then people who serve in the armed forces get all the training and equipment they need from them.
You have the 2nd amendment because you have the 2nd amendment. Blaming that on the UK is weird, especially after it was written quite some time after 1776.
You having some guns, little or no training, and no logistical support isn't going to stop the US government. The more you keep telling yourself it will, the more of a surprise you'll be in for when you need to stop them. It's pathetic on so many levels.
Insurgencies which succeed generally use explosives, not gun battles. Ask anyone coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan which they were more concerned with: armed locals or IEDs.
Which is easier: going out and spending money on a tank, moving it around, figuring out how to detonate it, etc. or just point your gun at someone and pull the trigger? Guns are made to be efficient killing devices. That's their intended use. If you can't see the difference, I weep for you and any future you have a hand in shaping.
They will find a way, but it takes far more effort and therefor is less likely to happen, and more likely they will not succeed and/or get caught in the process.
By hijacking a serious discussion which affects thousands of people a year in order to argue about inconsequential nonsense you are showing the world just how little you give a shit about anything which is not you. You're a terrible human being.
Hydrogen is a bitch to transport and store. Battery swapping makes much more sense, and considering everyone with an electric car starts with a full tank every morning, most people won't even need to "refuel" away from home unless they drive further than the range of their car per day, and that range will only increase as improvements to the technology are made.
You do realise every post you make provides an example of the inability of your software to block spam. You are hurting your product with every post you make. You are also tainting the image of your software, as now most people think "APK" means "That idiot fool on Slashdot who posts massive rants, stalks people, and pretends to be other people who come to his defense". Seriously, please stop, for you.
That paper outlines how a compromised reader can be used to perform a MITM attack, not that Chip and Pin is broken, regardless of the title of the paper. So we're still waiting...
The fears and objections have been largely ignored for both those wanting to accept refugees and those not. A refugee centre opened up in my neighbourhood (our city of ~275k has about 6 the last I heard) and nothing happened. Sure, you see a few people walking around, but that's it. No crime wave. No disturbances. You might want to demote your "will" to "might", as clearly it's not a certainty.
Claiming economic migrants just want good benefits is a disgrace, as you are attempting to cast them all as acting in poor faith. Most want to work, just as most people who are born in Europe want to work. Some will want to sponge off and do nothing, just as some Europeans do. Generalising so much about a group of people you clearly don't know much about is pretty much the definition of a xenophobe.
I think it's perfectly suitable to brand someone making horrible, vague statements about foreigners as a xenophobic muppet, as that's what they are.
He didn't mention anything about them being legal or illegal, just that "migrants are bad" for Germany, even though every single study on the issue shows quite the opposite. So yeah, he's a nationalist, xenophobic, ignorant muppet who would rather put hundreds of thousands of people in dangerous circumstances before looking past his own nose.
You were drunk and with friends, and you don't know the protocol. If you can't see how that compares to the real deal, you might want to reconsider posting in public on this topic.
You apparently don't know that the word "computer" was used to describe anything that would perform mundane computational tasks. Before electronic computers we had manual computers, and before that we had human computers. You not knowing what a word means does not make for a strong argument, but it sure does a good job of showing your ignorance.
Something I feel should be pointed out: there is absolutely nothing in common between ride sharing and Uber, except a car and more than one person is involved.
You do know that "leftist" doesn't mean anything, right? its only purpose is signifying you as a purely reactionary muppet who can only perceive of "us" and "them", of "left" and "right", and who is patently incapable of making any greater distinction. Do you even know what "schism" means? It certainly doesn't sound like it from the way you used it. Which is not particularly surprising, as you don't seem to care what words mean as long as they sound good to you.
And that provides absolutely no benefit above the current German system. Not all the world has as terrible taxis as the US. I've never been in a poor German taxi - they're usually always recent Mercedes, clean, working well, and the drivers are well insured and well trained (including basic medical training). If Uber has found fault in any country's system, they should fix the system instead of stomping around like a petulant toddler demanding the whole world bows to its demands, screaming when they are told to calm down.
Slashdot Mirror
Are the reasons still valid, though? If the government is so despotic it needs removing, the question comes down to whether the US armed forces are going to protect the government or the citizens. If it protects the government, no amount of fat accountants & other assorted weekend warriors with no training or logistics support is going to change anything. If the armed forces protect the civilians by ousting the government, then whether the civilians are armed or not doesn't matter in the slightest.
If you'd said the 2nd amendment was valid in the time it was written, you'd be right, but clearly a lot has changed since then.
Times change, and the disparity between the firepower of the populace and the armed forces changes too. Ignoring that doesn't really help the discussion.
Well, most countries don't base their civil defense on 18th century ideas, and so they don't have these ridiculous situations to deal with. Most countries create a military, and then people who serve in the armed forces get all the training and equipment they need from them.
And should you suffer a mental problem, you could be the shooter! Yay for lowering barriers to massacres!!
You have the 2nd amendment because you have the 2nd amendment. Blaming that on the UK is weird, especially after it was written quite some time after 1776.
You having some guns, little or no training, and no logistical support isn't going to stop the US government. The more you keep telling yourself it will, the more of a surprise you'll be in for when you need to stop them. It's pathetic on so many levels.
Question... what is required for there to be a shooting in the first place?
Answer... guns
Insurgencies which succeed generally use explosives, not gun battles. Ask anyone coming back from Iraq or Afghanistan which they were more concerned with: armed locals or IEDs.
Which is easier: going out and spending money on a tank, moving it around, figuring out how to detonate it, etc. or just point your gun at someone and pull the trigger? Guns are made to be efficient killing devices. That's their intended use. If you can't see the difference, I weep for you and any future you have a hand in shaping.
They will find a way, but it takes far more effort and therefor is less likely to happen, and more likely they will not succeed and/or get caught in the process.
It seems to be the case in other countries...
Keep your xenophobia to yourself. "Cultural friction". Wow. You're really not very good at this "being a human" thing, are you?
By hijacking a serious discussion which affects thousands of people a year in order to argue about inconsequential nonsense you are showing the world just how little you give a shit about anything which is not you. You're a terrible human being.
Hydrogen is a bitch to transport and store. Battery swapping makes much more sense, and considering everyone with an electric car starts with a full tank every morning, most people won't even need to "refuel" away from home unless they drive further than the range of their car per day, and that range will only increase as improvements to the technology are made.
You do realise every post you make provides an example of the inability of your software to block spam. You are hurting your product with every post you make. You are also tainting the image of your software, as now most people think "APK" means "That idiot fool on Slashdot who posts massive rants, stalks people, and pretends to be other people who come to his defense". Seriously, please stop, for you.
That paper outlines how a compromised reader can be used to perform a MITM attack, not that Chip and Pin is broken, regardless of the title of the paper. So we're still waiting...
The fears and objections have been largely ignored for both those wanting to accept refugees and those not. A refugee centre opened up in my neighbourhood (our city of ~275k has about 6 the last I heard) and nothing happened. Sure, you see a few people walking around, but that's it. No crime wave. No disturbances. You might want to demote your "will" to "might", as clearly it's not a certainty.
Claiming economic migrants just want good benefits is a disgrace, as you are attempting to cast them all as acting in poor faith. Most want to work, just as most people who are born in Europe want to work. Some will want to sponge off and do nothing, just as some Europeans do. Generalising so much about a group of people you clearly don't know much about is pretty much the definition of a xenophobe.
I think it's perfectly suitable to brand someone making horrible, vague statements about foreigners as a xenophobic muppet, as that's what they are.
He didn't mention anything about them being legal or illegal, just that "migrants are bad" for Germany, even though every single study on the issue shows quite the opposite. So yeah, he's a nationalist, xenophobic, ignorant muppet who would rather put hundreds of thousands of people in dangerous circumstances before looking past his own nose.
You were drunk and with friends, and you don't know the protocol. If you can't see how that compares to the real deal, you might want to reconsider posting in public on this topic.
To a scared, small-minded person I'm sure it does seem more likely.
You apparently don't know of the masses of socialized systems in place in the US. "Convert to socialism" he says. Wow.
What the fuck does skin colour have to do with anything? You really need to get out more.
You apparently don't know that the word "computer" was used to describe anything that would perform mundane computational tasks. Before electronic computers we had manual computers, and before that we had human computers. You not knowing what a word means does not make for a strong argument, but it sure does a good job of showing your ignorance.
Something I feel should be pointed out: there is absolutely nothing in common between ride sharing and Uber, except a car and more than one person is involved.
You kind of proved the GP's point with your black and white reasoning, and it's about as far from the truth as possible.
You do know that "leftist" doesn't mean anything, right? its only purpose is signifying you as a purely reactionary muppet who can only perceive of "us" and "them", of "left" and "right", and who is patently incapable of making any greater distinction. Do you even know what "schism" means? It certainly doesn't sound like it from the way you used it. Which is not particularly surprising, as you don't seem to care what words mean as long as they sound good to you.
And that provides absolutely no benefit above the current German system. Not all the world has as terrible taxis as the US. I've never been in a poor German taxi - they're usually always recent Mercedes, clean, working well, and the drivers are well insured and well trained (including basic medical training). If Uber has found fault in any country's system, they should fix the system instead of stomping around like a petulant toddler demanding the whole world bows to its demands, screaming when they are told to calm down.