I believe it's elementary school, like 5th grade, they teach the three branches of government. I think the U.S. Constitution is covered in middle school. It probably depends upon the school and school district.
I'm for state rights (less federal government intervention), so I would hope that all 50 states would require something like the following for graduation. One semester of American Law and one semester of American Government.
Arresting someone without probable cause is wrong. Arresting someone on a hunch is wrong. Searching someone without probably cause is wrong. Searching someone's house without a warrent is wrong (unless in the heat of a moment or something like that, i.e. if someone ran in there).
And in my opinion, copyright and parent crimes, should be on the civil side of the law, not the criminal side, as it seems to be becoming.
Concerning censorship and the broadcast television channels, the ones anyone can get with a cheap t.v. and an antenna. The only compromise I could see would be something like requiring t.v. ratings, and if a network were to violate that, fine them. Since the broadcast channels are free to anyone. That is, broadcast channels is to someone standing on a street, and cable channels is to someone in the privacy of their own home. If someone is naked on the street, it's a violation of someone's right not to see.
But if they decide to individually tax us (in addition to our current taxes), that's going to hurt some people. If they really need the money so badly, put something like this on their webpage... "If you wish to see this service continue, please consider donating by clicking here. Our goal is _amount_ by _date_. Thank you."
One idea, and I'm sure others have thought of it, is to connect the two semi-circles then draw lines. How the lines are drawn, don't know. We could try common letters, vowels, sentences, alphabets, etc.
Wouldn't the key to cracking it lie in like a key inside of the code? That somewhere in the code, it explains how to decode itself. Also, by looking at the artwork itself, it looks like two semi-circles.
If I'm not mistaken, you can't force people to prevent crimes. It would be like arresting a shop owner for having no call-police security button under their counter. It would be like requiring automobile manufacturers to prevent cars from speeding.
Getting paid by the task is another great idea. Where an employer gives a project to do, and you get paid when it is done, no matter how long it takes. That also gives an incentive to figure out a way to get it done faster, without cutting quality.
We currently have a 40 hour work-week. If we cut 10 hours from it, get paid the same salary, we'd have more time for recreation and family. That would sure relieve stress. It would also decrease unemployment since employers would need to hire more workers.
The problem is that a good liar can make it to office, and be set for four more years. Once the candidate is elected, there's no way to really reverse it.
Anyone agree with this idea? For all elected executive positions at the state and federal level, every two years during the general election, we'd always be given the choice to recall the candidates.
Perhaps we need an option added to e-mail accounts. Like a checkbox that says, "Check here if you wish to let __________ inherit this e-mail account when you end up dead." The blank line would be either another person's e-mail address to receive the password, or a real life name and address.
In the last September primary, where we could only vote under one party for each race, what prevents malicious voting?
Since the primary is how Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians choose their candidate to go onto the general election, what prevents others from malicious voting? Like a Green, Reform-er?, or some other party who shouldn't be voting in other people's parties.
I'm still a bit confused on how everyone gets into the elections. Like the qualifications for persons/parties for the general election, and how the primary figures into that.
But yes, I hope you're right about the outside primary thing. I'd rather see the party organization elect from within their own parties.
Another idea, and it's a bad one probably, would be to do this. Have it the same way we did last September, but allow each person to vote under each party for each race. So if there are three major political parties and 20 races, that's 60 votes.
The problem with how we had it in the last September primary is this...
The political parties don't really have a formal membership. This creates problems when they want their "members" to vote for a candidate to go onto the general election.
One solution that is unlikely, and would create more problems, is for each political party organization to hold their own primaries, with the winner going onto the general election.
If they think they can get people to eventually replace their DVD players, it's a pipe dream. It's not going to happen. We may have jumped from tapes to discs, but that's because tapes can stretch and wear. Poor people are going to be so upset if they have to buy a new DVD player just so it can play a new format.
Organizations and the like, trying to control what we can and cannot do with the media (data) we buy, is nothing more than a downward spiral. They need to learn to compromise with the consumer, instead of thinking with their wallets.
Why do you assume we are voting for a Party in an election? I generally vote for a Person, myself.
And why do you believe that every Party has a right to be represented in the election? If I found my own Party, consisting of myself and my immediate family, do I have a Right to have the CrimsonAvenger Party on every ballot? If I do not, then how is this a Right? If I do, will you enjoy ballots with hundreds, if not thousands of names?
I could have sworn it's written in laws or something, in my state, that each party has a right to be represented on the general election ballot. There are two basic types of parties. Major and minor. Major parties are ones which received like 1% of the least even year general election. Minor parties, don't have that, and must go through gathering signatures or something. If you were to start your own party, you first gather signatures to get on the ballot, then you hope that 1% of the voters vote for your party. Hence why we have three major political parties in my state.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe it's elementary school, like 5th grade, they teach the three branches of government. I think the U.S. Constitution is covered in middle school. It probably depends upon the school and school district.
I'm for state rights (less federal government intervention), so I would hope that all 50 states would require something like the following for graduation. One semester of American Law and one semester of American Government.
Arresting someone without probable cause is wrong. Arresting someone on a hunch is wrong. Searching someone without probably cause is wrong. Searching someone's house without a warrent is wrong (unless in the heat of a moment or something like that, i.e. if someone ran in there).
And in my opinion, copyright and parent crimes, should be on the civil side of the law, not the criminal side, as it seems to be becoming.
Concerning censorship and the broadcast television channels, the ones anyone can get with a cheap t.v. and an antenna. The only compromise I could see would be something like requiring t.v. ratings, and if a network were to violate that, fine them. Since the broadcast channels are free to anyone. That is, broadcast channels is to someone standing on a street, and cable channels is to someone in the privacy of their own home. If someone is naked on the street, it's a violation of someone's right not to see.
Shread your papers, or better yet, if you have a fireplace, burn them. That's if you don't need them anymore, and this is about financial papers.
But if they decide to individually tax us (in addition to our current taxes), that's going to hurt some people. If they really need the money so badly, put something like this on their webpage... "If you wish to see this service continue, please consider donating by clicking here. Our goal is _amount_ by _date_. Thank you."
One idea, and I'm sure others have thought of it, is to connect the two semi-circles then draw lines. How the lines are drawn, don't know. We could try common letters, vowels, sentences, alphabets, etc.
Wouldn't the key to cracking it lie in like a key inside of the code? That somewhere in the code, it explains how to decode itself. Also, by looking at the artwork itself, it looks like two semi-circles.
Wisdom and knowledge are too different things. I think wisdom can be said to be the application/use of knowledge.
One solution would be to have a disclaimer saying, "Do not use this product for illegal purposes. We are not liable for your actions."
acquire enough wisdom. But the question is, are you someone who believes in reincarnation, the afterlife, etc.?
If I'm not mistaken, you can't force people to prevent crimes. It would be like arresting a shop owner for having no call-police security button under their counter. It would be like requiring automobile manufacturers to prevent cars from speeding.
Getting paid by the task is another great idea. Where an employer gives a project to do, and you get paid when it is done, no matter how long it takes. That also gives an incentive to figure out a way to get it done faster, without cutting quality.
We currently have a 40 hour work-week. If we cut 10 hours from it, get paid the same salary, we'd have more time for recreation and family. That would sure relieve stress. It would also decrease unemployment since employers would need to hire more workers.
The problem has two sides. One, violating another's copyright. Two, movie companies charging a lot for their movies.
The problem is that a good liar can make it to office, and be set for four more years. Once the candidate is elected, there's no way to really reverse it.
Anyone agree with this idea? For all elected executive positions at the state and federal level, every two years during the general election, we'd always be given the choice to recall the candidates.
Perhaps we need an option added to e-mail accounts. Like a checkbox that says, "Check here if you wish to let __________ inherit this e-mail account when you end up dead." The blank line would be either another person's e-mail address to receive the password, or a real life name and address.
If we allowed each voter to have one vote under each party for each race in the primary, wouldn't we end up with compromises on candidates?
In the last September primary, where we could only vote under one party for each race, what prevents malicious voting?
Since the primary is how Democrats, Republicans, and Libertarians choose their candidate to go onto the general election, what prevents others from malicious voting? Like a Green, Reform-er?, or some other party who shouldn't be voting in other people's parties.
I'm still a bit confused on how everyone gets into the elections. Like the qualifications for persons/parties for the general election, and how the primary figures into that.
But yes, I hope you're right about the outside primary thing. I'd rather see the party organization elect from within their own parties.
Another idea, and it's a bad one probably, would be to do this. Have it the same way we did last September, but allow each person to vote under each party for each race. So if there are three major political parties and 20 races, that's 60 votes.
Do you know the laws/requirements on how to get in the primary, whether for a major party, minor party, or as an independent?
Since people strongly disliked the last September primary, and since I-872 in my opinion is illegal, what do you propose?
The problem with how we had it in the last September primary is this...
The political parties don't really have a formal membership. This creates problems when they want their "members" to vote for a candidate to go onto the general election.
One solution that is unlikely, and would create more problems, is for each political party organization to hold their own primaries, with the winner going onto the general election.
If they think they can get people to eventually replace their DVD players, it's a pipe dream. It's not going to happen. We may have jumped from tapes to discs, but that's because tapes can stretch and wear. Poor people are going to be so upset if they have to buy a new DVD player just so it can play a new format.
Organizations and the like, trying to control what we can and cannot do with the media (data) we buy, is nothing more than a downward spiral. They need to learn to compromise with the consumer, instead of thinking with their wallets.
Why do you assume we are voting for a Party in an election? I generally vote for a Person, myself.
And why do you believe that every Party has a right to be represented in the election? If I found my own Party, consisting of myself and my immediate family, do I have a Right to have the CrimsonAvenger Party on every ballot? If I do not, then how is this a Right? If I do, will you enjoy ballots with hundreds, if not thousands of names?
I could have sworn it's written in laws or something, in my state, that each party has a right to be represented on the general election ballot. There are two basic types of parties. Major and minor. Major parties are ones which received like 1% of the least even year general election. Minor parties, don't have that, and must go through gathering signatures or something. If you were to start your own party, you first gather signatures to get on the ballot, then you hope that 1% of the voters vote for your party. Hence why we have three major political parties in my state.
Make it so when someone tries editing a popular article, ones that may be frequent to warring, a CAPTCHA is required.
Have a succesful CAPTCHA give 30 to 60 minutes of access to that specific article for each unique IP address.
Have a failed CAPTCHA require a 10 minute block from retrying the CATPCA for that specific article.
Here's what I want to know. Which system should we have in Washington State?
A) Blanket primary - Cross party primary voting, declared unconstitutional after like 70 years
B) Pick a party and vote only for that party in each race - The one so many people hated, the one we used last September.
C) Top two primary - I-872 created this
D) Instant Runoff Voting
E) Something else entirely...
You mean where voters have to pick a party, and vote in that party in all races? A lot of people hated that.