Something very similar was discussed back in the early 90's in the newsgroup alt.pave.the.earth! Wonder if someone might use these posts for prior art even.
Actually many of us who are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment despise the Patriot Act. Acknowledging that the 2nd Amendment is important does not mean that we want to give up other rights. The Patriot Act overstepped the bounds of the Federal government just like the Gun Control Act of 1986.
DO NOT USE THE PHONE OR EMAIL This can't be stated enough. Check out http://www.creditboards.com/ for more then enough information to successfully fight the 3 major Credit Reporting Agencies. About 2.5 years ago I had one stupid credit card company decide that since my sister and I have the same first letter in our first names that we were the same person and they closed my account also and listed it as a charge off due to bankruptcy which my sister did file. After I figured out what they did the company was very quick to correct the mistake. I then sent letters to the 3 CRA's and two of them followed the law and removed the bankruptcy and updated my account. After repeated attempts with the third I sent a letter labeled Intent to Sue and listed the legal statues that I was prepared to sue under. Almost immediately they corrected the information.
Send everything in writing and send it certified mail return receipt, yes it is a pain but when the time comes to the the CRA to small claims court you have everything you need.
And those 3 reasons are a huge part of why desktop Linux has been on life support for years, way too much effort has been devoted to them. Nerds concentrate on those features and don't get me wrong they are important. What constantly gets left out is usability, installation needs to be simple enough that I can give my parents a CD/DVD and let them install it. There needs to be a consistent UI between applications and components. Installing software must not require editing config files and if additional components are needed then it should just be a click Yes to install additional components.
Wish I had mod points right now. My position bridges between technical and management right now and I now how important being able to demonstrate productivity is. The best way is with problem tickets and change control.
Why shouldn't they be allowed to do this? Doesn't matter if you think what he did was a crime or not. He plead guilty and placed himself at the mercy of the court. Now his crime is Internet related so it is reasonable that he be monitored. I for one would rather that the money not be spent to develop a monitoring tool for an extremely minor OS and require that the people use Windows in cases like this.
You have got to be joking. While the big 3 are no where near as liberally biased as some would have you believe, it is obvious they are biased. Have you forgotten Dan Rather already? Did you by any chance see the "in-depth" report on black rifles a couple weeks ago? Often times the most effective way of showing a bias is by only using facts that can be proven, the bias comes in how they are presented and what is left out. Dan Rather is a great example, in his liberal bias he reported before verifying. I'd be willing to bet if he had the same sort of documentation about something Kerry did he would have had his staff dig into it to prove it was false or ignored it.
On the other hand this whole issue of bias is a recent creation, news outlets have always been biased. It is just lately that this myth of unbiased reporting has existed. No matter how hard someone tries when covering news there will be a personal bias, then you tend to get like minded people working at an organization. The people who think the same way as their boss have a better chance of being promoted if they are competent, which unintentionally suppress dissent and reinforces a bias.
What makes your idea of civilization the one true way? Take a Native American studies class and you will see that the issue is far more complex then "adapting to new realities".
Whaling is very closely monitored and restricted with the intention of growing the population while at the same time meeting the needs of human cultures.
Personally I'm more alarmed about people trying to force their standards on others then the closely monitored and regulated hunting of whales by Native Americans.
Quotas are sent by people who have far more knowledge then I do and I suspect far more knowledge then you have of the whale population.
These Native Americans are hunting whales to survive and maintain their culture and history, they aren't out there on speed boats shooting every whale they see and leaving it to rot. Instead they will have a supply of food, blubber, bones for survival and I'm fairly sure there is a religious aspect surrounding whaling.
So instead you would rather have the Native Americans in Alaska starve? Native Americans have a history of sustainable hunting and it wasn't until Europeans came that animals were over-hunted.
Another factor to keep in mind is the religious aspect.
There's no need for this to be the standard in cars distributed to the general public. If the car manufacturers want to make cars that go over 100mph, keep it to the realm of muscle cars that manage to get 15mpg. I'd much rather have an econobox that has a top speed of 80mph (just so I can accelerate around the people not actually driving the speed limit), gets 100mpg, and is relatively cheap to purchase and maintain.
There are several problems with setting up a car to have a top speed of 80mph. I had an 02 Kia Rio Cinco that could barely do 85mph. Part of the problem is leaving near Denver we lose about 25% of the sea level power due to the altitude. It can be very dangerous to pass in such an underpowered car. Next since the car has so little power when not if someone does something stupid in front of you you have fewer options on how to respond to avoid an accident.
Though you have a very outdated idea of muscle car performance. My fun car is a 2000 Z28 Camaro, stock it was rated at 305HP and dynoed 300RWHP, on a highway road trip I got 30mpg and typically in mixed driving it got at least 25mpg. So just because a car makes good power doesn't mean it has to get horrible gas mileage. Of course I've since heavily modified the car so it doesn't get anywhere near 25/30 anymore.[p][p]
If it blocks cell phones this could be a very good thing for public places like movie theaters. Too many people still haven't figured out how to turn off their cell phone or even worse they talk loudly during a movie. Sure if they are talking you can get someone from the staff to remove them, but it is still interrupting the movie.
Did you RTFA? They said they didn't think it would change the out come of the election, because they weren't able to do a full recount. The recount they did was rigged. They said they were only following standard procedure. If that's not going to effect the outcome I don't know what is. The flawed recount still gave Kerry more votes. If this was done in every county in Ohio it could have swung the election.
Obviously you did not RTFA. A full machine recount was done according to the article. The workers made the 3% hand recount match the conditions that would trigger a full machine recount and not a full hand recount. This is still wrong, but isn't going to have a noticeable impact on the results.
I'll even be helpful for you and for the moderators who marked you up when they also didn't read or understand the article.
They did the hand and machine count of 3 percent of the votes 34 of the 1,436 precincts and when the totals matched, the recount was completed by machines.
Please stop with the FUD. The new passport is bad enough without adding fuel to the fire. Check out the official information according to the US Government.
What will happen if my Electronic passport fails at a port-of-entry?
The chip in the passport is just one of the many security features of the new passport. If the chip fails, the passport remains a valid travel document until its expiration date. The bearer will continue to processed by the port-of-entry officer as if he/she had a passport without a chip.
You've never seen anything from Handgun Control Inc I take it. They have attacked every part of the NRA as often as they can. One thing they really hate is the idea of a population that knows that a firearm isn't some evil demon out to destroy the world.
How hard is to prove that you really need a gun ? Lets see:
- "I'm a truck driver, I drive late at night at low traffic roads"
- "I'm a lawyer, judge etc"
- "I'm a 24h shop owner that stay late at night on my shop"
- "I'm a driver that transport valueable items, prone to be stolen"
It is not that hard to prove. IF you really need a gun.
As a citizen of the United States of America there are only two things to prove that anyone really needs a firearm. First they have not been found gulity of felony. Secondly they wish to exercise our 2nd Amendment right. This is all the proof anyone needs to own a firearm.
Firearms can be used defensively. Take a look at dictionary.com and see what the word defense means. " 1. The act of defending against attack, danger, or injury.
2. A means or method of defending or protecting.
3. Sports. The act or an instance of defending a championship against a challenger: will box in his third defense of his title.
4. An argument in support or justification of something. See Synonyms at apology.
5. Law.
1. The action of the defendant in opposition to complaints against him or her.
2. The defendant and his or her legal counsel.
6. The science or art of defending oneself; self-defense.
7. (often defns) Sports.
1. Means or tactics used in trying to stop the opposition from scoring.
2. The team or those players on the team attempting to stop the opposition from scoring.
8. The military, governmental, and industrial complex, especially as it authorizes and manages weaponry production."
Numbers 1, 2 and 6 clearly show what defense means and defending yourself when an intruder has invaded your home with a firearm is a defensive use of a firearm.
I completely agree with you, but I don't have any input into how the images are designed.
I do think it is a good idea to rename the Administrator account, but it shouldn't become a users account.
I know of a little company called IBM that the standard is for users to be Administrators on Windows systems. When you first start up a new laptop/PC it asks you what you want to rename the Administrator account to.
Please read and understand exactly what I posted. If you had bothered to read the actual law you would know that this is the one of the key phrases.
and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
So far the only thing you have demonstrated is you know how to use a Strawman attack.
I never said or even implied that merely damaging property was enough to use the "Make my Day Law".
I have the right to expect absolute safety in my home. I will detain anyone who breaks and enters. If and only if they make like they are going to use physical force then I am justified in shooting them.
I can tell at this point that trying to remove your ignorance is a waste of time. I hope for your sake that you never become a victim, but right now you have the victim mentality.
"Of course you can kill them but what happens once your hard on goes away? You have just shot somebody for the crime of trying to steal your TV. If you were not home they might get a misdemenor or a maybe a light jail sentence but you took it upon yourself to give this guy the death sentence without even a jury or a trial. I guess some living human beings life is worth less to you then your TV. I guess you would rather snuff out somebody then to try and get your TV back by reporting the crime and talking to your insurance company or the police. I get the feeling that the argument I just laid out doesn't really wash with you. I get the feeling that you are not capable of understanding other peoples pain. To you a human life is worth a TV. Take my TV, I kill you, we are even!."
Amazing how you lack the ability to understand what you read. The very first thing I said was detain the criminal. You seem to be under the imprssion that detain means kill, detain means hold the scum who attempted to take my stuff at gun point until the police arrive and charge them. If they make any threats then where I live you are allowed to use force up to and including deadly force.
A human life is always worth more then a TV but no matter how much pain you are in it doesn't give someone the right to break in and steal stuff. Your argument about someone being in pain is just an attempt to shift the responsibility of the criminal actions. "Oh look he had to steal because of his circumstances."
I also belive in making my house the least attractive target as possible by having an alarm system with outside placards. Keeping door and windows locked and on the first floor window covers closed.
"All I can hope for is that you do actually kill somebody. Then you will find out that it's not so simple as "he was in my house so I shot him". You see it's not really legal to kill people who are in your house. there will be a trial, you will most likely end up in jail with the rest of the murders. At best you will be sued civilly and lose all your pocessions not just your TV."
Maybe were you live your right to defend yourself has been restricted or maybe you don't have a right to even defend yourself and your property but here in Colorado we have a law that allows the use of deadly force and gives immunity from criminal and civil prosecution. I know and understand this law, because I firmly belive that owning firearms requires me to be famialir with the the local, State and Federal laws. It also gives me a responsiblty to practice and know how to use my firearms.
Just for your benefit I've included the applicable State law below so that you can be educated on my local laws that apply to how I can defend my home and possesions.
18-1-704.5 Use Of Deadly Physical Force Against An Intruder ("Make My Day law")
1. The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
3. Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions or subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force.
4. Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force.
I am shocked that people think it is ok to break in a house. To steal my things. In the worst case to either rape or kill someone. If someone breaks into my house the big question is does my roommate detain or kill them with his.357 or do I do it with my.45. They have made the choice that they do not respect my property so I will return that lack of respect. Hopefully they will give up and wait for the police, but if they even look like they are going to attack they have made their final choice.
If you have broken into my house you have commited a crime and made your choice. There is no grey area if you are caught in the act.
No matter if people like it or not law, order and society are built on fear. More often than not a person makes a choice based on the consequences of that action.
Slashdot Mirror
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.destroy.the.earth/browse_thread/thread/969522c2a9463f53/743868a735db695a?lnk=st&q=#743868a735db695a/
Civilization (not Sid's, the classic Avalon Hill).
Star Fleet Battles has more depth then any game I've ever played. The single biggest problem is finding people willing to learn the game.
Actually many of us who are strong supporters of the 2nd Amendment despise the Patriot Act. Acknowledging that the 2nd Amendment is important does not mean that we want to give up other rights. The Patriot Act overstepped the bounds of the Federal government just like the Gun Control Act of 1986.
No highs, no lows, gotta be Bose.
Send everything in writing and send it certified mail return receipt, yes it is a pain but when the time comes to the the CRA to small claims court you have everything you need.
And those 3 reasons are a huge part of why desktop Linux has been on life support for years, way too much effort has been devoted to them. Nerds concentrate on those features and don't get me wrong they are important. What constantly gets left out is usability, installation needs to be simple enough that I can give my parents a CD/DVD and let them install it. There needs to be a consistent UI between applications and components. Installing software must not require editing config files and if additional components are needed then it should just be a click Yes to install additional components.
Wish I had mod points right now. My position bridges between technical and management right now and I now how important being able to demonstrate productivity is. The best way is with problem tickets and change control.
Why shouldn't they be allowed to do this? Doesn't matter if you think what he did was a crime or not. He plead guilty and placed himself at the mercy of the court. Now his crime is Internet related so it is reasonable that he be monitored. I for one would rather that the money not be spent to develop a monitoring tool for an extremely minor OS and require that the people use Windows in cases like this.
At least this is closer to News for Nerds then slashdot trying to discuss politics.
On the other hand this whole issue of bias is a recent creation, news outlets have always been biased. It is just lately that this myth of unbiased reporting has existed. No matter how hard someone tries when covering news there will be a personal bias, then you tend to get like minded people working at an organization. The people who think the same way as their boss have a better chance of being promoted if they are competent, which unintentionally suppress dissent and reinforces a bias.
Whaling is very closely monitored and restricted with the intention of growing the population while at the same time meeting the needs of human cultures.
Quotas are sent by people who have far more knowledge then I do and I suspect far more knowledge then you have of the whale population.
These Native Americans are hunting whales to survive and maintain their culture and history, they aren't out there on speed boats shooting every whale they see and leaving it to rot. Instead they will have a supply of food, blubber, bones for survival and I'm fairly sure there is a religious aspect surrounding whaling.
Another factor to keep in mind is the religious aspect.
There are several problems with setting up a car to have a top speed of 80mph. I had an 02 Kia Rio Cinco that could barely do 85mph. Part of the problem is leaving near Denver we lose about 25% of the sea level power due to the altitude. It can be very dangerous to pass in such an underpowered car. Next since the car has so little power when not if someone does something stupid in front of you you have fewer options on how to respond to avoid an accident.
Though you have a very outdated idea of muscle car performance. My fun car is a 2000 Z28 Camaro, stock it was rated at 305HP and dynoed 300RWHP, on a highway road trip I got 30mpg and typically in mixed driving it got at least 25mpg. So just because a car makes good power doesn't mean it has to get horrible gas mileage. Of course I've since heavily modified the car so it doesn't get anywhere near 25/30 anymore.[p][p]
If it blocks cell phones this could be a very good thing for public places like movie theaters. Too many people still haven't figured out how to turn off their cell phone or even worse they talk loudly during a movie. Sure if they are talking you can get someone from the staff to remove them, but it is still interrupting the movie.
Obviously you did not RTFA. A full machine recount was done according to the article. The workers made the 3% hand recount match the conditions that would trigger a full machine recount and not a full hand recount. This is still wrong, but isn't going to have a noticeable impact on the results.
I'll even be helpful for you and for the moderators who marked you up when they also didn't read or understand the article.
Please stop with the FUD. The new passport is bad enough without adding fuel to the fire. Check out the official information according to the US Government.
What will happen if my Electronic passport fails at a port-of-entry?
The chip in the passport is just one of the many security features of the new passport. If the chip fails, the passport remains a valid travel document until its expiration date. The bearer will continue to processed by the port-of-entry officer as if he/she had a passport without a chip.
You've never seen anything from Handgun Control Inc I take it. They have attacked every part of the NRA as often as they can. One thing they really hate is the idea of a population that knows that a firearm isn't some evil demon out to destroy the world.
How hard is to prove that you really need a gun ? Lets see:
- "I'm a truck driver, I drive late at night at low traffic roads"
- "I'm a lawyer, judge etc"
- "I'm a 24h shop owner that stay late at night on my shop"
- "I'm a driver that transport valueable items, prone to be stolen"
It is not that hard to prove. IF you really need a gun.
As a citizen of the United States of America there are only two things to prove that anyone really needs a firearm. First they have not been found gulity of felony. Secondly they wish to exercise our 2nd Amendment right. This is all the proof anyone needs to own a firearm.
Firearms can be used defensively. Take a look at dictionary.com and see what the word defense means.
" 1. The act of defending against attack, danger, or injury.
2. A means or method of defending or protecting.
3. Sports. The act or an instance of defending a championship against a challenger: will box in his third defense of his title.
4. An argument in support or justification of something. See Synonyms at apology.
5. Law.
1. The action of the defendant in opposition to complaints against him or her.
2. The defendant and his or her legal counsel.
6. The science or art of defending oneself; self-defense.
7. (often defns) Sports.
1. Means or tactics used in trying to stop the opposition from scoring.
2. The team or those players on the team attempting to stop the opposition from scoring.
8. The military, governmental, and industrial complex, especially as it authorizes and manages weaponry production."
Numbers 1, 2 and 6 clearly show what defense means and defending yourself when an intruder has invaded your home with a firearm is a defensive use of a firearm.
I completely agree with you, but I don't have any input into how the images are designed. I do think it is a good idea to rename the Administrator account, but it shouldn't become a users account.
I know of a little company called IBM that the standard is for users to be Administrators on Windows systems. When you first start up a new laptop/PC it asks you what you want to rename the Administrator account to.
and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
So far the only thing you have demonstrated is you know how to use a Strawman attack.
I never said or even implied that merely damaging property was enough to use the "Make my Day Law".
I have the right to expect absolute safety in my home. I will detain anyone who breaks and enters. If and only if they make like they are going to use physical force then I am justified in shooting them.
I can tell at this point that trying to remove your ignorance is a waste of time. I hope for your sake that you never become a victim, but right now you have the victim mentality.
"Of course you can kill them but what happens once your hard on goes away? You have just shot somebody for the crime of trying to steal your TV. If you were not home they might get a misdemenor or a maybe a light jail sentence but you took it upon yourself to give this guy the death sentence without even a jury or a trial. I guess some living human beings life is worth less to you then your TV. I guess you would rather snuff out somebody then to try and get your TV back by reporting the crime and talking to your insurance company or the police.
I get the feeling that the argument I just laid out doesn't really wash with you. I get the feeling that you are not capable of understanding other peoples pain. To you a human life is worth a TV. Take my TV, I kill you, we are even!."
Amazing how you lack the ability to understand what you read. The very first thing I said was detain the criminal. You seem to be under the imprssion that detain means kill, detain means hold the scum who attempted to take my stuff at gun point until the police arrive and charge them. If they make any threats then where I live you are allowed to use force up to and including deadly force.
A human life is always worth more then a TV but no matter how much pain you are in it doesn't give someone the right to break in and steal stuff. Your argument about someone being in pain is just an attempt to shift the responsibility of the criminal actions. "Oh look he had to steal because of his circumstances."
I also belive in making my house the least attractive target as possible by having an alarm system with outside placards. Keeping door and windows locked and on the first floor window covers closed.
"All I can hope for is that you do actually kill somebody. Then you will find out that it's not so simple as "he was in my house so I shot him". You see it's not really legal to kill people who are in your house. there will be a trial, you will most likely end up in jail with the rest of the murders. At best you will be sued civilly and lose all your pocessions not just your TV."
Maybe were you live your right to defend yourself has been restricted or maybe you don't have a right to even defend yourself and your property but here in Colorado we have a law that allows the use of deadly force and gives immunity from criminal and civil prosecution. I know and understand this law, because I firmly belive that owning firearms requires me to be famialir with the the local, State and Federal laws. It also gives me a responsiblty to practice and know how to use my firearms.
Just for your benefit I've included the applicable State law below so that you can be educated on my local laws that apply to how I can defend my home and possesions.
18-1-704.5 Use Of Deadly Physical Force Against An Intruder ("Make My Day law")
1. The general assembly hereby recognizes that the citizens of Colorado have a right to expect absolute safety within their own homes.
2. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 18-1-704, any occupant of a dwelling is justified in using any degree of physical force, including deadly physical force, against another person when that other person has made an unlawful entry into the dwelling, and when the occupant has a reasonable belief that such other person has committed a crime in the dwelling in addition to the uninvited entry, or is committing or intends to commit a crime against a person or property in addition to the uninvited entry, and when the occupant reasonably believes that such other person might use any physical force, no matter how slight, against any occupant.
3. Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions or subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from criminal prosecution for the use of such force.
4. Any occupant of a dwelling using physical force, including deadly physical force, in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) of this section shall be immune from any civil liability for injuries or death resulting from the use of such force.
I am shocked that people think it is ok to break in a house. To steal my things. In the worst case to either rape or kill someone. If someone breaks into my house the big question is does my roommate detain or kill them with his .357 or do I do it with my .45. They have made the choice that they do not respect my property so I will return that lack of respect. Hopefully they will give up and wait for the police, but if they even look like they are going to attack they have made their final choice.
If you have broken into my house you have commited a crime and made your choice. There is no grey area if you are caught in the act.
No matter if people like it or not law, order and society are built on fear. More often than not a person makes a choice based on the consequences of that action.