As long as the "intimidation" is not physically threatening, that's pretty obviously a form of communication that should be protected and couldn't occur elsewhere.
I agree.
How would you suggest communicating with customers other than this?
Strikes are generally held at production facilities, not retail stores or wholesale outlets, thus the customer does not generally come into contact with strikers. I never have. Ads in the newspaper or press conferences would be much more effective. But, as I said, that is not the purpose of a strike. The purpose is to gain leverage against the owners by stopping production through lack of manpower, achieved by intimidation and/or the simple lack of available workers.
But I concede your point, I think strikes are sometimes legitimate methods of communication which would be impossible without public streets and sidewalks.
humans are basicly corrupt and, as a whole, don't care about anything other than power
I place my faith in the people
You're confusing me here. Either the people can be trusted or they need government to do more than merely represent them.
OK. Maybe you're right and corporations are dangerous. Do we abolish them? Give the government more control over them?
Do we bring back debtors' prisons, too?
The mitigation of risk that incorporation and bankruptcy laws provide goes a long way toward encouraging commerce, big and small alike.
I have to admit, I'm not all that crazy about some big corporations myself. I'd like to hear any ideas you might have on how to reign them in without harming the economy.
Good point. Although, the true purpose of a strike is usually to intimidate "scabs" and prevent production. Communication with customers can be accomplished much more effectively in other ways.
So what are you saying? That State officials are superhuman and less likely to be corrupt than private organizations? Remember who has the big guns when you place your faith in the government over the people.
I'm saying that if all public property is privatized, do civil rights have any meaning at all?
Sure, they mean exactly what they've always meant, that the government recognizes the rights outlined in the BOR as natural and inalienable, and will not interfere. Supposedly. For example, you can publish a newspaper saying whatever you like (as long as it is not obscene, etc.), but no shopowner is required to carry that newspaper. That's how it has always been.
As far as public property disappearing, I don't have the impression that much free speech of consequence is dependent on public property. Please give an example.
As we've learned over the past few decades, free speech only applies to public property.
Wrong. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights only exist for the purpose of limiting the power of the Federal (and State, theoretically) governments. It makes no other guarantees about the behavior of your fellow citizens and was never meant to.
As a side effect of this, a person is able to throw you off of his property for any reason, including saying things he doesn't like. What are you saying? You shouldn't be able to throw a burglar out of your house if he starts quoting "Mein Kampf", because that would be a violation of his free speech rights? What about the rights of the property owner?
If you don't like the concept of private property, go ahead and move to Vietnam or North Korea or something, there you can starve equally.
As a gun owner and being licensed to carry, I have to make a point here. Some people have a very nonchalant attitude about guns, probably from too much TV and movies.
The truth is, a gun is not your friend, it is not a toy. It is as dangerous as a rattlesnake unless it receives your utmost attention and respect. My pistol absolutely stays in its holster, unless, God forbid, it is required to save my life, or an innocent victim's life. I don't take it out to play with it, or to show my friends, or even to look at it; just to put it in the safe at the end of the day, or clean it.
If I have even one drink, the gun stays in the safe.
And, if you ever have to shoot to defend a life, you are absolutely responsible for every bullet that you fire. You will be prosecuted for any injury to innocent bystanders, and, even in a justifiable shooting, you will probably be sued in civil court by the criminal or his family. Even if you win, you will still be out tens of thousands in lawyers' fees.
I'm incredibly polite and non-confrontational when I am packing.:-) It is my responsibility as the armed citizen to see that any conflict is de-escalated and resolved peaceably. I don't want to kill anyone, and neither do 99.99999% of humanity, as evidenced by the fact that so many of us, with minimal training, are given access to huge metal vehicles fueled by explosives that travel at tremendous speeds, yet (relatively) rarely do we ever hurt each other with them, even accidentally.
Self-defense is a natural right, given to all living creatures by God, and the right to keep and bear arms is our (Americans, that is) birthright as free men, entrusted to us by our forebears. It is better to be alive and bear the consequences than to let your gift of life be snuffed out without a struggle. Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, and the Pope all agree that the use of deadly force is justified in the defense of innocent life.
But please, get some training, for you and the whole family, and respect the power of the gun. Be careful.
One more thing, a German Shepherd or similar dog is at least as good a defense as any gun. For home defense, there is nothing better than a pair of dogs. That's not to preclude the need for a firearm, but they will ensure that you have time to reach your gun, if nothing else. Unfortunately, you can't bring your pooches with you everywhere.
... and nothing on John Kerry's service record or his post-service Vietnam war related activities? Kerry is anything from a hero to a traitor who should have been executed a long time ago, depending on who you believe. Much more interesting stuff.
... of a NIC I once had. It was a run-of-the-mill 3Com 905. Every computer it was installed in, the motherboard burned out within 2 or 3 days. I went through 3 motherboards before I figured out it was the Cursed-NIC-From-Hell.
I keep it around just so I can stomp on it now and then. It's quite therapeutic.
I just wish nuclear power wasn't politically dead in the USA. It's really the only way to replace all the coal and oil we burn to produce the huge amount of electricity we use.
That explains why there are so many female master painters in the classical Western style, which uses subtle color variations to portray a scene in a very lifelike manner.
Make them bring their own computers to work, confiscate their hard drives, give them an empty hard drive and a slackware install CD. Tell them they'll get their hard drives back in a week.
They'll figure it out if they like their pr0n enough...
Most tools (excluding guns and explosives, and even those can be debated) take on beneficial or harmful characteristics only when wielded by a person who has made a choice.
What are you saying? Guns and explosives all come with some sort of hidden mind-control device that rob their wielders of free will?
Slashdot Mirror
The message that being poor is an insurmountable barrier is a terrible reinforcement for the populace at large.
Sure. But it's a great way for liberals to get votes by telling you they're going to play Robin Hood to help.
True. But the Constitution as it stands today does limit state governments (see Amendment XIV, Section 1).
As long as the "intimidation" is not physically threatening, that's pretty obviously a form of communication that should be protected and couldn't occur elsewhere.
I agree.
How would you suggest communicating with customers other than this?
Strikes are generally held at production facilities, not retail stores or wholesale outlets, thus the customer does not generally come into contact with strikers. I never have. Ads in the newspaper or press conferences would be much more effective. But, as I said, that is not the purpose of a strike. The purpose is to gain leverage against the owners by stopping production through lack of manpower, achieved by intimidation and/or the simple lack of available workers.
But I concede your point, I think strikes are sometimes legitimate methods of communication which would be impossible without public streets and sidewalks.
humans are basicly corrupt and, as a whole, don't care about anything other than power
I place my faith in the people
You're confusing me here. Either the people can be trusted or they need government to do more than merely represent them.
OK. Maybe you're right and corporations are dangerous. Do we abolish them? Give the government more control over them?
Do we bring back debtors' prisons, too?
The mitigation of risk that incorporation and bankruptcy laws provide goes a long way toward encouraging commerce, big and small alike.
I have to admit, I'm not all that crazy about some big corporations myself. I'd like to hear any ideas you might have on how to reign them in without harming the economy.
Good point. Although, the true purpose of a strike is usually to intimidate "scabs" and prevent production. Communication with customers can be accomplished much more effectively in other ways.
So what are you saying? That State officials are superhuman and less likely to be corrupt than private organizations? Remember who has the big guns when you place your faith in the government over the people.
I'm saying that if all public property is privatized, do civil rights have any meaning at all?
Sure, they mean exactly what they've always meant, that the government recognizes the rights outlined in the BOR as natural and inalienable, and will not interfere. Supposedly. For example, you can publish a newspaper saying whatever you like (as long as it is not obscene, etc.), but no shopowner is required to carry that newspaper. That's how it has always been.
As far as public property disappearing, I don't have the impression that much free speech of consequence is dependent on public property. Please give an example.
They forget that humans are basicly corrupt and, as a whole, don't care about anything other than power.
My, aren't we misanthropic today?
As we've learned over the past few decades, free speech only applies to public property.
Wrong. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights only exist for the purpose of limiting the power of the Federal (and State, theoretically) governments. It makes no other guarantees about the behavior of your fellow citizens and was never meant to.
As a side effect of this, a person is able to throw you off of his property for any reason, including saying things he doesn't like. What are you saying? You shouldn't be able to throw a burglar out of your house if he starts quoting "Mein Kampf", because that would be a violation of his free speech rights? What about the rights of the property owner?
If you don't like the concept of private property, go ahead and move to Vietnam or North Korea or something, there you can starve equally.
I was thinking along the same lines.
It's not going to be pretty, but I doubt it will be as bad as some people say.
True that.
As a gun owner and being licensed to carry, I have to make a point here. Some people have a very nonchalant attitude about guns, probably from too much TV and movies.
The truth is, a gun is not your friend, it is not a toy. It is as dangerous as a rattlesnake unless it receives your utmost attention and respect. My pistol absolutely stays in its holster, unless, God forbid, it is required to save my life, or an innocent victim's life. I don't take it out to play with it, or to show my friends, or even to look at it; just to put it in the safe at the end of the day, or clean it.
If I have even one drink, the gun stays in the safe.
And, if you ever have to shoot to defend a life, you are absolutely responsible for every bullet that you fire. You will be prosecuted for any injury to innocent bystanders, and, even in a justifiable shooting, you will probably be sued in civil court by the criminal or his family. Even if you win, you will still be out tens of thousands in lawyers' fees.
I'm incredibly polite and non-confrontational when I am packing. :-) It is my responsibility as the armed citizen to see that any conflict is de-escalated and resolved peaceably. I don't want to kill anyone, and neither do 99.99999% of humanity, as evidenced by the fact that so many of us, with minimal training, are given access to huge metal vehicles fueled by explosives that travel at tremendous speeds, yet (relatively) rarely do we ever hurt each other with them, even accidentally.
Self-defense is a natural right, given to all living creatures by God, and the right to keep and bear arms is our (Americans, that is) birthright as free men, entrusted to us by our forebears. It is better to be alive and bear the consequences than to let your gift of life be snuffed out without a struggle. Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, and the Pope all agree that the use of deadly force is justified in the defense of innocent life.
But please, get some training, for you and the whole family, and respect the power of the gun. Be careful.
One more thing, a German Shepherd or similar dog is at least as good a defense as any gun. For home defense, there is nothing better than a pair of dogs. That's not to preclude the need for a firearm, but they will ensure that you have time to reach your gun, if nothing else. Unfortunately, you can't bring your pooches with you everywhere.
Hey timothy, maybe you could come over and work some of your magic on my water tap. I do love wine.
Amendments require a plurality of Congress. That's the point, so we're not subject to the whims of a few men (or women).
Interpreting the law can only get so creative before it is out of bounds.
... and nothing on John Kerry's service record or his post-service Vietnam war related activities? Kerry is anything from a hero to a traitor who should have been executed a long time ago, depending on who you believe. Much more interesting stuff.
I think Slashdot's political section is biased.
One wonders how you'd go about indexing every life form including undiscovered species...
Step one: discover all the undiscovered species.
Step two: index every life form by eye color.
Simple enough. Pshh, I can't believe I have to lay all this out for you.
Ah, but then the cheap arline would be a threat to national security because a terrorist could slip on and bomb/fly it into a building.
Oh, that would never happen. Take off that tinfoil hat you paranoid right-wing nut-job.
How are we supposed to follow a law when the law itself can't be disclosed?
Errr... ummm... trial and error? (pun intended)
... of a NIC I once had. It was a run-of-the-mill 3Com 905. Every computer it was installed in, the motherboard burned out within 2 or 3 days. I went through 3 motherboards before I figured out it was the Cursed-NIC-From-Hell.
I keep it around just so I can stomp on it now and then. It's quite therapeutic.
What's the matter, isn't slashdot becoming DU fast enough for you? :P
Yes, pebble bed reactors are very safe.
I just wish nuclear power wasn't politically dead in the USA. It's really the only way to replace all the coal and oil we burn to produce the huge amount of electricity we use.
patriarchal and oppressive nature of Western society As opposed to the enlightened and egalitarian societies of... where, exactly?
a whole lot of those painters were also gay, which might explain part of it.
What are you saying? Gay men have 2 X chromosomes?
That explains why there are so many female master painters in the classical Western style, which uses subtle color variations to portray a scene in a very lifelike manner.
Rembrandt, being male, was obviously a hack.
Make them bring their own computers to work, confiscate their hard drives, give them an empty hard drive and a slackware install CD. Tell them they'll get their hard drives back in a week.
They'll figure it out if they like their pr0n enough...
Most tools (excluding guns and explosives, and even those can be debated) take on beneficial or harmful characteristics only when wielded by a person who has made a choice.
What are you saying? Guns and explosives all come with some sort of hidden mind-control device that rob their wielders of free will?
Yes, abolish all armies and then there will be peace in the world.
*eye roll*
Grow up.