Change within a species is not evolution, it is adaptation or a fluke. Evolution, for the longest time, was defined as change from one species to another (which has never been found). Just because 'scientists' have altered the definition of evolution (because they can not find evidence to back up what they thought was right) does not make it right. A dog has always been a dog, a cow has always been a cow, and a human has always been a human (except for my brother, he looked a lot like a monkey when he was little).
Correct. As both are weapons and both can bring the aircraft down, although in different ways. In the case of the laser, it's not the plane in jeopardy, but the eyes of the pilot/copilot (and once they are blinded, the plane is blinded).
Why should the judge be leniant? What if this person had blinded someone and caused the plane or helicopter to crash, possibly killing many people? This is no different than if this person had been aiming a gun, rocket launcher, whatever, at the aircraft. He probably thought he was being funny or 'just joking', but this is serious.
Stupidity has no limits and should be stopped.
So, you're saying that a person that attempts to rape, but fails, should get a lesser sentence than someone who succeeds? I hope not. The crime is the same. (you know, all crimes are really the same, it's our morals that put values on them)
In the case of this person, the crime is theft (whether or not they succeeded), not hacking or cracking. They intended to steal money, plain and simple, and that's what should be the focus (not how they went about it). If they had succeeded, it could have turned into multiple cases of identity theft, which can mess up innocent peoples lives for a long time.
If we (americans) were tougher on criminals (i.e. cutting off the hands of thieves, death penalty for rapists and murderers, etc., whether or not they succeeded), potential criminals would think twice before committing crimes (I'm not going to steal that, if I'm caught, I'll lose a hand). It shouldn't matter if you succeed in the crime; If you thought it, you've committed it in your heart. Make the punishment fit the crime. Stop funding the rich lifestyle in many of our prisons, and take away all rights when someone is in prison.
I see, so now I can go out and buy a casette that barely plays anymore from the used record store, and then rightfully download that album so that I can actually listen to it?
Yes! Why not? If I purchase something, I own it. I don't care (or even think about) if I buy something new or used (as in a used CD store, or buying used clothes at a salvation army store). It doesn't matter. If I pay for it, it's mine, and I have the right to use it in anyway I see fit. It's our right, and we need to fight for it.
>>When I drive my Subaru it doesn't pop-up ads for Ford.
>When you drive your Subaru, the radio plays ads for Ford. And Chevy. And Kia, &c
When you use a Windows based system with IE/WMP, you run the risk of going to a non-MS website or listening to a non-MS channel on the 'internet radio'. You can surf to Apple, Red Hat, etc. You might here an ad for a non-MS product over the internet.
>>When I drink my Starbucks I don't get told that I could also be drinking Folgers.
>When you go to the grociery store, you see House Blend next to #10 cans of Folgers.
When you go to CompUSA, Bestbuy, etc., you'll see other OSs besides Windows XX being sold.
>>If your ignorant mother had a computer that had no web browser on it would she know a different way to get to the Internet, find an FTP site that has browsers for download, retrieve one, and install it?
>Non-sequiter. Would anyone not familiar with the technology know how?
No. And if you install Mankdrake, Fedora, etc., they each have a default web browser. If you don't go exploring, you may never find that you have several installed and can choose from them. Same applies to WinXP. Yes, it only has IE installed by default, but you are free to go find an alternative (free or otherwise) and install. I don't expect MS to tell me how to do that, and I don't expect Fedora/Mandrake/etc. to tell me how either, and they don't.
Slashdot Mirror
Change within a species is not evolution, it is adaptation or a fluke. Evolution, for the longest time, was defined as change from one species to another (which has never been found). Just because 'scientists' have altered the definition of evolution (because they can not find evidence to back up what they thought was right) does not make it right. A dog has always been a dog, a cow has always been a cow, and a human has always been a human (except for my brother, he looked a lot like a monkey when he was little).
Amen!
Correct. As both are weapons and both can bring the aircraft down, although in different ways. In the case of the laser, it's not the plane in jeopardy, but the eyes of the pilot/copilot (and once they are blinded, the plane is blinded).
Does it matter? People need to think before doing things.
Why should the judge be leniant? What if this person had blinded someone and caused the plane or helicopter to crash, possibly killing many people? This is no different than if this person had been aiming a gun, rocket launcher, whatever, at the aircraft. He probably thought he was being funny or 'just joking', but this is serious. Stupidity has no limits and should be stopped.
Both, just to be safe!
So, you're saying that a person that attempts to rape, but fails, should get a lesser sentence than someone who succeeds? I hope not. The crime is the same. (you know, all crimes are really the same, it's our morals that put values on them) In the case of this person, the crime is theft (whether or not they succeeded), not hacking or cracking. They intended to steal money, plain and simple, and that's what should be the focus (not how they went about it). If they had succeeded, it could have turned into multiple cases of identity theft, which can mess up innocent peoples lives for a long time. If we (americans) were tougher on criminals (i.e. cutting off the hands of thieves, death penalty for rapists and murderers, etc., whether or not they succeeded), potential criminals would think twice before committing crimes (I'm not going to steal that, if I'm caught, I'll lose a hand). It shouldn't matter if you succeed in the crime; If you thought it, you've committed it in your heart. Make the punishment fit the crime. Stop funding the rich lifestyle in many of our prisons, and take away all rights when someone is in prison.
I see, so now I can go out and buy a casette that barely plays anymore from the used record store, and then rightfully download that album so that I can actually listen to it?
Yes! Why not? If I purchase something, I own it. I don't care (or even think about) if I buy something new or used (as in a used CD store, or buying used clothes at a salvation army store). It doesn't matter. If I pay for it, it's mine, and I have the right to use it in anyway I see fit. It's our right, and we need to fight for it.