Virtually everyone in America believes that there are necessary limits to 2nd amendment rights. For instance, you can not own an anti aircraft gun in this country.
Given this, quite a lot of states have decided that having their citizenry living in perpetual fear that they could be shot over a stupid confrontation by a lunatic ( https://www.washingtonpost.com... ) is something that should not exist in a civilized society.
In California, I can speak my mind generally without fear of some one shooting me or at the least trying to intimidate me with their firearm.
You had me nodding along in approval until you refered to smart watches as "gaudy". Smart watches are the exact opposite of gaudy which is why they fail miserably as a fashion accessory (one of your two usss for a watch). For your reference:
gaudy1 ôd/Submit adjective extravagantly bright or showy, typically so as to be tasteless.
Modern smart watches are anything but "bright and showy". "Cheap and crapy" are more the adjectives I'd use for what one looks like.
"Leave them alone to do their thing. If they're threatening buildings, that's a sign that you need to build a bigger firebreak around those buildings. Not a reason to put the fire out."
That would take one truly massive fire break to stop hot embers from flying over it in the wind.
And yet in making this post on a US-centric website you are using the very tool with which you could convert acres into any other system of measurement that exists in less time then it took you to make this post.
"Oversimplifying and collectivizing people is what made the annoying orange be the president in first place, and what makes the far left be so fucking lunatic (as is the thing that makes the far right be fucking lunatic as well)."
You mean over simplifying like you are doing right here in your post? The US is the least collectivized of Western nations. Blaming any small increase in collectivization in this country we might have had in the last couple of decades for our current president or for current political extremism is preposterous as well.
"Doesn't work if the material is too hot. Once the oxygen comes back, if the fuel source is still hot enough it just bursts back into flames. It's not like an oil/gas rig when the material is coming out in an unignited stream, and then hitting the burning part to ignite. In those cases the explosion breaks the stream and when it succeeds there's nothing left hot enough to reignite it. Part of the reason why have to remove some of the parts before they attempt it or the hot metal will just start the fire back up."
This is a potential problem regardless of how the fire is fought. In regards to this problem specifically when bombs are used, other fire fighting techniques would almost definitely be used after the bomb. Having fire fighters come through to take care of a smoldering area is far safer, easier, and more cost effective then having them come in to take on a full blown blaze. The bomb could also be dropped on a remote area far sooner than fire fighters might be able to reach it.
"Now here's the other part of this mess. Using real munitions is VERY expensive. If you add smart bombs to the mix, you've multiplied the price by many times! Sure the warhead is expensive, but the guidance unit is so much more expensive! As in you can buy a new Tesla for the price of one of those guidance units."
Guidance systems wouldn't be necessary for devices like these. Dumb bombs would have all the necessary accuracy for a job like this, especially given that they are being dropped at the what is essentially the leisure of the pilot rather than in a combat scenario with the dozens of potential hazards that would have.
Dumb bombs are fairly cheap as well, as are basic guidance systems for them https://www.quora.com/How-much... . We're talking tens of thousands of dollars at most for the ones the military uses, some quite a lot cheaper.
"Then there's all that talk about a combustible case for the warhead. Hey, great idea! Except there aren't any, and that would be an expensive thing to build. Did you know that STEEL case of a warhead serves the purpose of confining the explosive so it can build up a higher pressure so it's a high order explosion instead of a low order explosion?"
And yet we manage to use explosives in all sorts of contexts where they do not have steel shells around them. Sure, the shell helps in building the explosion but it is absolutely not necessary in creating even a big explosion. Something cheap that disintegrates would work fine here as long as it holds together until the explosion.
"Exactly, imagine being caught in a forest fire somewhere without anybody's knowledge and that you have managed to find a sweet spot to stay alive and then the bombs come at you. Now you really get the battlefield experience!"
Why would this be used on areas without fires?
"Seriously, wild forest fire areas are hard to clear of human presence in advance due to their unpredictable nature. One might also think of animal casualties."
There are plenty of forest fires in remote areas where the likely-hood of people being present is fairly close to nil. As for animals, if they haven't figured out that they should run from the giant fire then they were probably going to die in whatever fire said bomb was used on.
In terms of comedic structure, I just slapped that together real quick. It's not great.
in regards to the right's outrage brigade it's not just the religious nuts anymore. I see far more people complaining about SJWs nowadays then I see the things that they are actually complaining about.
Also, I don't use twitter because it's stupid but I seriously doubt it's 90% progressive outrage. If it's anything like I see everywhere else in life it would be 5% progressive outrage, 25% conservative outrage over said progressive outrage, and 70% crap.
This coming from the same camp that constantly complains that the world has gotten too PC and that no one can take a joke anymore,
But if you follow the outrage logic of this group it makes sense:
* Outrage over conservatives making bigoted comments = "SJW are repressing us!" * Outrage over a couple of professional comedians making tasteless jokes = "Oh the horror, think of the children!"
Ergo, it's evil social justice warriors taking away our rights!
But when we make bigoted comments about Muslims, minorities, or anybody else not just like us... that's just us joking or engaging in "legitimate political discourse".
This sort of hypocrisy will not be sustainable for long going forward. You want to know why the center-left increasingly takes a reflexive "fuck you and fuck the horse you rode in on" attitude toward the right? This is why. Even most of the mainstream conservatives I know refuse to call this out and try to suck the oxygen out of the room rather than admit most of the people to their right are grade A assholes.
Just holding a mirror up to your post. There are assholes who are just looking for something to be outraged about on both the Right and the Left. In this case though, you're it.
It's the not wanting to pirate it that screws you here:)
It's really a stupid situation we're in that the only way for any of us to see good quality versions of movies that very few would debate are cultural icons is to pirate them. Given how popular Star Wars is right now Disney could make bundles of money just by going through the exact same efforts those volunteers who created the HD, non special edition pirate copies did.
Speaking of which, if you haven't watched the non special edition Harmy's release ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ) and you're an original trilogy fan you're really missing out. It's gorgeous.
No, I remember you stating that but that is not what "we are talking about". Being a transexual is widely regarded amoung psycologists as an intrinsic part of these people's identity much like being a guy is for me or being whatever you are to you. They can't be "reprogrammed" anymore than you or I can.
"You were wrong, as you know people will not truly accept a transgender as the sex they aren't."
51% of Americans are willing to accept them in the rest room whose gender assignment they identify with.
"As was already pointed out, 51% may choose to pander to those delusions, but it is not the same as believing those delusions are real. Of that 51%, how many would choose a sexual partner that was transgender?"
How is supporting equal rights the same as who one is sexually attracted to? I'm a man who likes women, does that mean I can't support gay rights? If I'm into Asian ladies do I have like the fact that black people in this country are disproportionately poor? You're being ridiculous.
"And many people identify as Jesus Christ returned. "Identifying" as the opposite sex doesn't change the basic biological facts."
The argument in favor of letting transgender people use the restroom for the gender they identify with is obviously not based on "basic biological facts". No one is claiming their sexual organs magically change because they identify as a different gender.
"When it came down to brass tacks, it was women who made the complaint about the transgender dude hanging around in their locker room with his genitalia exposed. That's the problem with the bleeding heart liberals in this country -- they're willing to support the "oppressed" minority with rules and regulations, but they don't think about the impact until they are confronted with it."
I'm sure there were a lot of people offended when blacks were able to eat in the same restaurant as white people too, that doesn't mean that desegregation was wrong.
"It was a budget bill. They didn't have to avoid a filibuster."
Yes I understand that. That's not the point at all. The point is that the Republicans can't even get a simple majority for immigration reform on their own so complaining that they can't get a super majority because of Democrats is stupid.
"If I care about immigration reform, which party is more likely to get me there? The one that wants no reform and blanket amnesty, or the one somewhat divided on the issue? Which party is calling for the abolition [vox.com] of ICE? Which party creates "sanctuary" cities/states? Which party runs cities that won't even convict a cold-blooded killer [cbsnews.com] of manslaughter?"
Here's the thing, we all care about more than one issue. Sure, the Democrats won't get us to illegal immigration reform, that I absolutely agree with. The other side though is that Republicans seem to be very unlikely to pass meaningful reform as their main points of focus are worthless anyways. It's the same thing with the national debt for me, yeah Republicans talk tough on it but they have no realistic plan for handling it and have now, once again, very obviously made it much, much worse. This is why I generally vote Democrat for national elections, the republicans talk on illegal immigration and the debt very clearly does not match their walk. Meanwhile Democrats seem to sometimes deliver on their promises in areas that we both support.
"And we're always told how we should look to Europe for more."
Hey, they have ones that clearly work that we don't over here. Take socialized medicine. The UK's socialized medicine costs their country less than half of what our healthcare does per capita and is available to everyone. Sure, our healthcare is better than there's but it is most definitely not twice as good. In this case, socialism would save us money.
"My point is that all "rights" are not created equal. There's a huge difference between not enslaving somebody versus being forced to respect the delusions of 0.1% the population."
As pointed out already, 51% of the country doesn't think they're delusions.
"Yes, they are. Somebody who believes Santa Claus is real is delusional, whether I pander to those beliefs or not."
Your example is dumb as Santa does not exist. Meanwhile there are people born as one sex who really do identify as the other.
"Why don't you ask the women who were confronted with a biological male's genitalia? So progressive!"
You obviously didn't look at the link I posted. Women are actually far more likely to support transgender rights then men are. Your "But think of the precious ladies!" doesn't hold water.
Slashdot Mirror
Virtually everyone in America believes that there are necessary limits to 2nd amendment rights. For instance, you can not own an anti aircraft gun in this country.
Given this, quite a lot of states have decided that having their citizenry living in perpetual fear that they could be shot over a stupid confrontation by a lunatic ( https://www.washingtonpost.com... ) is something that should not exist in a civilized society.
In California, I can speak my mind generally without fear of some one shooting me or at the least trying to intimidate me with their firearm.
It's funny because you're so dumb you can't keep Nazi's and communists straight in a written body of text!
Don't forget that the "jewelry" looks like cheap plastic crap!
You had me nodding along in approval until you refered to smart watches as "gaudy". Smart watches are the exact opposite of gaudy which is why they fail miserably as a fashion accessory (one of your two usss for a watch). For your reference:
gaudy1
ôd/Submit
adjective
extravagantly bright or showy, typically so as to be tasteless.
Modern smart watches are anything but "bright and showy". "Cheap and crapy" are more the adjectives I'd use for what one looks like.
I have no idea what you're trying to convey here. Hopefully English is your second language so you have a solid excuse for your incoherencey.
The massively larger amount of CO2 created by fires, duh.
"Leave them alone to do their thing. If they're threatening buildings, that's a sign that you need to build a bigger firebreak around those buildings. Not a reason to put the fire out."
That would take one truly massive fire break to stop hot embers from flying over it in the wind.
And yet in making this post on a US-centric website you are using the very tool with which you could convert acres into any other system of measurement that exists in less time then it took you to make this post.
"Oversimplifying and collectivizing people is what made the annoying orange be the president in first place, and what makes the far left be so fucking lunatic (as is the thing that makes the far right be fucking lunatic as well)."
You mean over simplifying like you are doing right here in your post? The US is the least collectivized of Western nations. Blaming any small increase in collectivization in this country we might have had in the last couple of decades for our current president or for current political extremism is preposterous as well.
"Doesn't work if the material is too hot. Once the oxygen comes back, if the fuel source is still hot enough it just bursts back into flames. It's not like an oil/gas rig when the material is coming out in an unignited stream, and then hitting the burning part to ignite. In those cases the explosion breaks the stream and when it succeeds there's nothing left hot enough to reignite it. Part of the reason why have to remove some of the parts before they attempt it or the hot metal will just start the fire back up."
This is a potential problem regardless of how the fire is fought. In regards to this problem specifically when bombs are used, other fire fighting techniques would almost definitely be used after the bomb. Having fire fighters come through to take care of a smoldering area is far safer, easier, and more cost effective then having them come in to take on a full blown blaze. The bomb could also be dropped on a remote area far sooner than fire fighters might be able to reach it.
"Now here's the other part of this mess. Using real munitions is VERY expensive. If you add smart bombs to the mix, you've multiplied the price by many times! Sure the warhead is expensive, but the guidance unit is so much more expensive! As in you can buy a new Tesla for the price of one of those guidance units."
Guidance systems wouldn't be necessary for devices like these. Dumb bombs would have all the necessary accuracy for a job like this, especially given that they are being dropped at the what is essentially the leisure of the pilot rather than in a combat scenario with the dozens of potential hazards that would have.
Dumb bombs are fairly cheap as well, as are basic guidance systems for them https://www.quora.com/How-much... . We're talking tens of thousands of dollars at most for the ones the military uses, some quite a lot cheaper.
"Then there's all that talk about a combustible case for the warhead. Hey, great idea! Except there aren't any, and that would be an expensive thing to build. Did you know that STEEL case of a warhead serves the purpose of confining the explosive so it can build up a higher pressure so it's a high order explosion instead of a low order explosion?"
And yet we manage to use explosives in all sorts of contexts where they do not have steel shells around them. Sure, the shell helps in building the explosion but it is absolutely not necessary in creating even a big explosion. Something cheap that disintegrates would work fine here as long as it holds together until the explosion.
"Exactly, imagine being caught in a forest fire somewhere without anybody's knowledge and that you have managed to find a sweet spot to stay alive and then the bombs come at you. Now you really get the battlefield experience!"
Why would this be used on areas without fires?
"Seriously, wild forest fire areas are hard to clear of human presence in advance due to their unpredictable nature. One might also think of animal casualties."
There are plenty of forest fires in remote areas where the likely-hood of people being present is fairly close to nil. As for animals, if they haven't figured out that they should run from the giant fire then they were probably going to die in whatever fire said bomb was used on.
I'm playing with the idea of buying a new phone and found this when I was checking phones out online about a week ago.
https://www.tomsguide.com/us/b...
Tom's has been around forever and as far as I know is still pretty reputable in regards to its recommendations.
"only fucking idiots like you..."
It seems weird to me that somebody who has a signature lamenting a supposed lack of honor today communicates like you do.
Global warming doesnt care of it's 300 million people making the polution or a billion.
Also, by not clearly defining what you are talking about you very nicely open the door to anyone who wants to discredit what you are saying.
That's completely false. China alone generates almost twice what we do https://www.ucsusa.org/global-...
Now per capita they generate much less which is pretty scary given the rate they're developing at and the number of people they have.
The only reason i want to down mod you is because of your stupid comment about how you're sure to get down modded. Get over yourself.
It's estimated that there are two million saunas in Finland, a country of 5 million.
This is hardly a luxury item over there. Apartments even have communal ones pretty much standard.
"How is this not effectively a price increase?"
Well you see, the price never changed.
In terms of comedic structure, I just slapped that together real quick. It's not great.
in regards to the right's outrage brigade it's not just the religious nuts anymore. I see far more people complaining about SJWs nowadays then I see the things that they are actually complaining about.
Also, I don't use twitter because it's stupid but I seriously doubt it's 90% progressive outrage. If it's anything like I see everywhere else in life it would be 5% progressive outrage, 25% conservative outrage over said progressive outrage, and 70% crap.
"This coming from the same "woke" camp that..."
This coming from the same camp that constantly complains that the world has gotten too PC and that no one can take a joke anymore,
But if you follow the outrage logic of this group it makes sense:
* Outrage over conservatives making bigoted comments = "SJW are repressing us!"
* Outrage over a couple of professional comedians making tasteless jokes = "Oh the horror, think of the children!"
Ergo, it's evil social justice warriors taking away our rights!
But when we make bigoted comments about Muslims, minorities, or anybody else not just like us... that's just us joking or engaging in "legitimate political discourse".
This sort of hypocrisy will not be sustainable for long going forward. You want to know why the center-left increasingly takes a reflexive "fuck you and fuck the horse you rode in on" attitude toward the right? This is why. Even most of the mainstream conservatives I know refuse to call this out and try to suck the oxygen out of the room rather than admit most of the people to their right are grade A assholes.
Just holding a mirror up to your post. There are assholes who are just looking for something to be outraged about on both the Right and the Left. In this case though, you're it.
It's the not wanting to pirate it that screws you here :)
It's really a stupid situation we're in that the only way for any of us to see good quality versions of movies that very few would debate are cultural icons is to pirate them. Given how popular Star Wars is right now Disney could make bundles of money just by going through the exact same efforts those volunteers who created the HD, non special edition pirate copies did.
Speaking of which, if you haven't watched the non special edition Harmy's release ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... ) and you're an original trilogy fan you're really missing out. It's gorgeous.
"We were talking about delusions, remember?"
No, I remember you stating that but that is not what "we are talking about". Being a transexual is widely regarded amoung psycologists as an intrinsic part of these people's identity much like being a guy is for me or being whatever you are to you. They can't be "reprogrammed" anymore than you or I can.
"You were wrong, as you know people will not truly accept a transgender as the sex they aren't."
51% of Americans are willing to accept them in the rest room whose gender assignment they identify with.
"As was already pointed out, 51% may choose to pander to those delusions, but it is not the same as believing those delusions are real. Of that 51%, how many would choose a sexual partner that was transgender?"
How is supporting equal rights the same as who one is sexually attracted to? I'm a man who likes women, does that mean I can't support gay rights? If I'm into Asian ladies do I have like the fact that black people in this country are disproportionately poor? You're being ridiculous.
"And many people identify as Jesus Christ returned. "Identifying" as the opposite sex doesn't change the basic biological facts."
The argument in favor of letting transgender people use the restroom for the gender they identify with is obviously not based on "basic biological facts". No one is claiming their sexual organs magically change because they identify as a different gender.
"When it came down to brass tacks, it was women who made the complaint about the transgender dude hanging around in their locker room with his genitalia exposed. That's the problem with the bleeding heart liberals in this country -- they're willing to support the "oppressed" minority with rules and regulations, but they don't think about the impact until they are confronted with it."
I'm sure there were a lot of people offended when blacks were able to eat in the same restaurant as white people too, that doesn't mean that desegregation was wrong.
"It was a budget bill. They didn't have to avoid a filibuster."
Yes I understand that. That's not the point at all. The point is that the Republicans can't even get a simple majority for immigration reform on their own so complaining that they can't get a super majority because of Democrats is stupid.
"If I care about immigration reform, which party is more likely to get me there? The one that wants no reform and blanket amnesty, or the one somewhat divided on the issue? Which party is calling for the abolition [vox.com] of ICE? Which party creates "sanctuary" cities/states? Which party runs cities that won't even convict a cold-blooded killer [cbsnews.com] of manslaughter?"
Here's the thing, we all care about more than one issue. Sure, the Democrats won't get us to illegal immigration reform, that I absolutely agree with. The other side though is that Republicans seem to be very unlikely to pass meaningful reform as their main points of focus are worthless anyways. It's the same thing with the national debt for me, yeah Republicans talk tough on it but they have no realistic plan for handling it and have now, once again, very obviously made it much, much worse. This is why I generally vote Democrat for national elections, the republicans talk on illegal immigration and the debt very clearly does not match their walk. Meanwhile Democrats seem to sometimes deliver on their promises in areas that we both support.
"And we're always told how we should look to Europe for more."
Hey, they have ones that clearly work that we don't over here. Take socialized medicine. The UK's socialized medicine costs their country less than half of what our healthcare does per capita and is available to everyone. Sure, our healthcare is better than there's but it is most definitely not twice as good. In this case, socialism would save us money.
"My point is that all "rights" are not created equal. There's a huge difference between not enslaving somebody versus being forced to respect the delusions of 0.1% the population."
As pointed out already, 51% of the country doesn't think they're delusions.
"Yes, they are. Somebody who believes Santa Claus is real is delusional, whether I pander to those beliefs or not."
Your example is dumb as Santa does not exist. Meanwhile there are people born as one sex who really do identify as the other.
"Why don't you ask the women who were confronted with a biological male's genitalia? So progressive!"
You obviously didn't look at the link I posted. Women are actually far more likely to support transgender rights then men are. Your "But think of the precious ladies!" doesn't hold water.