Can you vote for marijuana to be mayor or president? No. Then it isn't a political crime.
There are aspects of so-called "victimless crime" about it, but not political crime. Drug use generates plenty of genuine crime, including crimes of violence.
Al Qaida killed as many people on 11 September 2001 as the Japanese killed on 7 December 1941. The US went to war with both despite the fact that traffic deaths killed more people than enemy attacks in both those years by 10x or more.
Al Qaida has not reached the Gates of Vienna yet, but they aspire to eventually. There is a choice: Fight the fire in the frying pan, wait to fight it until the kitchen burns, or wait to fight it when the house burns. Plenty of people seem to be saying, "Don't fight it at all." That isn't the choice you have unless you are content to consign your children or grandchildren to being slaves.
Al Qaida and its allies have retaken Fallujah, which was taken by US forces in one of the harder battles in Iraq. They fight to take Syria, Yemen, and other lands. They cast a longing gaze at Spain. In time they think Europe and the world.
Does being the world leader in imprisoning people count?
Not really, no. A nation being termed a "police state" generally is associated with political oppression. It is drug use that has really driven up the prison population, and like it or not that isn't political crime. The question of the US prison population is getting more political attention, and maybe there will be some changes. Or, maybe youth will decide that drugs aren't the way to go seeing how it can turn out.
But to reiterate, no, it doesn't count by the usual criterion.
We are a police state regardless of what the Obamaites would have you think.
And this isn't to say that the right was any better but Bush & Company was a lot more honest about what they were up to. The silence from the left is deafening.
A "police state"? In what respect? Who has been sent to jail for making jokes about Obama? Who gets arrested for voting for the "wrong" political party? What is the nature of this so called "police state"? I would think it is about more than banning 32oz soft drinks.
Has al Qaeda decided to stop trying to attack the country? Have the nations that make themselves adversaries of the US decided to stop trying to spy or undermine the US? If not, why would the US stop defending itself?
we will not be happy.... until the fear mongering military industrial complex bankrupts this country. Rome was not built in a day, but neither did it fall in a day. We are falling now, will we catch it?
Rome didn't go bankrupt, it fell to barbarian invasion. Well, the barbarians just took another city, one we had taken from them, but now they have it back.
They are fighting in many places around the world to advance their causes. Eventually they are almost certain to become an enormous problem in Europe.
If you are worried about the US going bankrupt, it won't be because of defense spending, which is a part of the Constitutionally designated responsibility of defending the country, but rather social welfare spending combined with the growing weight of the deficit.
So to be accurate you should be complaining about Obamacare, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and so on, piling up a crushing weight of spending and debt. That constitutes the major part of Federal spending.
Would you care to expand upon that? Or is this the scenario we are looking at below?
If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong. -- Arthur C. Clarke
Thought experiments using analogues like the rubber sheet are often useful for visualization, organizing your thoughts, or providing a template to work on, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily provide a picture that is correct in all respects. The fact that they aren't accurate in all respects doesn't mean that they aren't useful representations.
Every company or government ministry has a huge incentive to cure it. In the case of companies they would crush the rest of the industry and get all the profit. Government ministries would be able to cut substantial costs and return people to health to continue paying taxes. It would lower overall medical spending (probably) while the company that did it would pull in massive revenue, and the shareholders would see their investment skyrocket. And then there is the immense prestige for all involved for such a cure.
By your theory there should never be a vaccine created since they prevent the need for practically all treatment while generally being very inexpensive to manufacture and administer. Many vaccines prevent chronic diseases, some of them with difficult and expensive treatments that would otherwise last a lifetime.
Well, technically the lobbyists only convince legislatures to pass laws governing certain technologies in various ways. Wind and solar aren't really being hold back so much as some companies would like more government investment. As to file sharing, you are free to share your own files, but IP laws are a limitation. That is different than claiming that a conspiratorial decision has been made to use long term cancer therapy or death as a way to generate profits instead of providing a cure. Any company that could provide a general cure for cancer would crush the rest of the industry until the patent expired, and possibly after that.
When you say that "you've missed the article's point almost as much as the crank," you're missing that I was addressing that conspiracy theory. And my answer was in line with the article, namely that there are hard problems in medicine, and the issues you mention are part of it.
Roman battlefield medicine was so advanced that after Rome fell it wasn't really equaled in some ways until the 20th Century. They were far better able to return men to health and fighting shape so that they could continue on as soldiers in service of the empire than pretty much any nation or empire for 1,600 years. Saving soldiers like that preserved fighting strength, retained highly skilled and experienced soldiers, and encouraged the soldiers to do their part in battle since they knew they would be taken care of. You would think there would be considerable interest in that from the military, so why didn't anyone else really equal that ancient empire until the last century?
It wasn't merely a question of technology and skill that allowed the Romans to do that, although that was important. There were issues of culture that played a significant role in developing their medical art. There was also a question of military organization and priorities involved. Try reading that article and then testing and filtering your ideas against it. Blaming a conspiracy is often the easy way out when the actual problem is much more complicated. Conspiracies do exist I grant you, but I don't think that is a good explanation for not curing cancer in a general way. Any company that could come up with a viable solution for that would stand a very good chance of crushing the rest of the industry, they would get all the profits until their patent expired.
No, what we were presented with is a conspiracy theory for which no evidence was given. If you want people to believe such an extraordinary claim, which would require a massive world-wide conspiracy lasting decades among all manner of countries, governments, and people of varying socio-political-religious orientations, you need to present some actual evidence instead of simply making a bare allegation. In short you are whining because a crank allegation with no supporting evidence was dismissed as such.
However, those two years have brought on voter registration laws designed to disenfranchise, laws so blatantly racist that it's pants-on-heads insane that anybody let them get away with it.
The simple reason is that the people who fund the research feel there is more profit in treating cancer than there ever would be in curing it.
That must be true since we know that there are no actual hard problems in medicine, science, math, or engineering. It's because of the oil companies that we don't have warp drive, antigravity, 500 mpg cars, and personal nuclear piles. The airlines, banks, and credit card companies are holding back time travel (no more late bills or missed flights). We have it on the authority of President Obama himself that surgeons do unnecessary surgery out of greed. Fermat's last theorem could have been solved hundreds of years ago except for the abacus and adding machine lobby. Shoe manufacturers are holding back personal jet packs since shoes would rarely wear out if you fly everywhere. And teacher's unions prevent people from learning foreign languages while they sleep, with one weird trick.
I have no idea where people get these ideas. Maybe food additives have something to do with it. Isn't hydrogenated-crank oil added to some foods? Or maybe it's just a problem due to chronic lack of sleep?
A fair question. You have to look at the potential harm. The 1/40,000/year LOVEINT at NSA is, in the grander scheme of things, a relatively limited privacy invasion. There aren't any reports of actual identity theft, or other more serious harm, for example. On the other hand, there have been quite a number of terrorist plots that could have killed or wounded hundreds or even thousands per attack. The Boston Marathon attack was a minor plot and it cost about 17 people their limbs, killed others, and wounded many more. It was a significant disruption to a major cultural event for the city, and disruptive overall. You only have to look at the recent Volgograd attacks for another example, and even those were far smaller than a number of plots in the US. Just last month there was an attempted suicide car bomb attack at an airport in Kansas. That could have easily killed a hundred or more people. That really isn't the same sneaking a look at someone's love letter. Another thing to keep in mind is that a string of "successful" attacks would serve as a recruiting tool, and there would be more people volunteering for such attacks.
Slashdot Mirror
The drug laws were passed to reduce illegal drug trade and use, not voting for the "wrong" political party.
Can you vote for marijuana to be mayor or president? No. Then it isn't a political crime.
There are aspects of so-called "victimless crime" about it, but not political crime. Drug use generates plenty of genuine crime, including crimes of violence.
Al Qaida killed as many people on 11 September 2001 as the Japanese killed on 7 December 1941. The US went to war with both despite the fact that traffic deaths killed more people than enemy attacks in both those years by 10x or more.
Al Qaida has not reached the Gates of Vienna yet, but they aspire to eventually. There is a choice: Fight the fire in the frying pan, wait to fight it until the kitchen burns, or wait to fight it when the house burns. Plenty of people seem to be saying, "Don't fight it at all." That isn't the choice you have unless you are content to consign your children or grandchildren to being slaves.
Al-Qaeda-linked force captures Fallujah amid rise in violence in Iraq
Al Qaida and its allies have retaken Fallujah, which was taken by US forces in one of the harder battles in Iraq. They fight to take Syria, Yemen, and other lands. They cast a longing gaze at Spain. In time they think Europe and the world.
Alarm in Spain over al-Qaeda call for its "reconquest"
HAMAS Targets Spain
Does being the world leader in imprisoning people count?
Not really, no. A nation being termed a "police state" generally is associated with political oppression. It is drug use that has really driven up the prison population, and like it or not that isn't political crime. The question of the US prison population is getting more political attention, and maybe there will be some changes. Or, maybe youth will decide that drugs aren't the way to go seeing how it can turn out.
But to reiterate, no, it doesn't count by the usual criterion.
We are a police state regardless of what the Obamaites would have you think.
And this isn't to say that the right was any better but Bush & Company was a lot more honest about what they were up to. The silence from the left is deafening.
A "police state"? In what respect? Who has been sent to jail for making jokes about Obama? Who gets arrested for voting for the "wrong" political party? What is the nature of this so called "police state"? I would think it is about more than banning 32oz soft drinks.
The FBI isn't becoming the KGB (Committee for State Security), it's becoming a hybrid of MI5 and the police. (MI5 doesn't have arrest powers.)
Has al Qaeda decided to stop trying to attack the country? Have the nations that make themselves adversaries of the US decided to stop trying to spy or undermine the US? If not, why would the US stop defending itself?
we will not be happy .... until the fear mongering military industrial complex bankrupts this country. Rome was not built in a day, but neither did it fall in a day. We are falling now, will we catch it?
Rome didn't go bankrupt, it fell to barbarian invasion. Well, the barbarians just took another city, one we had taken from them, but now they have it back.
Al-Qaeda-linked force captures Fallujah amid rise in violence in Iraq
They are fighting in many places around the world to advance their causes. Eventually they are almost certain to become an enormous problem in Europe.
If you are worried about the US going bankrupt, it won't be because of defense spending, which is a part of the Constitutionally designated responsibility of defending the country, but rather social welfare spending combined with the growing weight of the deficit.
Medicare and Other Entitlements Are Crowding Out Spending on Defense
So to be accurate you should be complaining about Obamacare, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and so on, piling up a crushing weight of spending and debt. That constitutes the major part of Federal spending.
TFA mentions that they are working on a variant for a rotary engine as well.
I'm sorry but the energy density of hopes and dreams is nowhere close to that of gasoline.
That's catchy, but I'll reformat it.
I'm sorry but ....
the energy density of hopes and dreams
is nowhere close to that of gasoline.
Trust me, I have a PhD in engineering.
Would you care to expand upon that? Or is this the scenario we are looking at below?
If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong. -- Arthur C. Clarke
Or perhaps we simply have a loose troll?
Thought experiments using analogues like the rubber sheet are often useful for visualization, organizing your thoughts, or providing a template to work on, but that doesn't mean that they necessarily provide a picture that is correct in all respects. The fact that they aren't accurate in all respects doesn't mean that they aren't useful representations.
Better: Fallen Angels
You haven't lived until you have a week of -20F/-28C, with perhaps the occasional dip to -30F/-34C, or even -40F/-40C.
Boiling water freezing in one second outdoors in Cold Norway
We'll leave polar extremes out of it for the moment, but will note that Chicago was just colder than the South Pole.
Hopefully you acted in time.
Every company or government ministry has a huge incentive to cure it. In the case of companies they would crush the rest of the industry and get all the profit. Government ministries would be able to cut substantial costs and return people to health to continue paying taxes. It would lower overall medical spending (probably) while the company that did it would pull in massive revenue, and the shareholders would see their investment skyrocket. And then there is the immense prestige for all involved for such a cure.
By your theory there should never be a vaccine created since they prevent the need for practically all treatment while generally being very inexpensive to manufacture and administer. Many vaccines prevent chronic diseases, some of them with difficult and expensive treatments that would otherwise last a lifetime.
Sorry, but you've got it all wrong.
Well, technically the lobbyists only convince legislatures to pass laws governing certain technologies in various ways. Wind and solar aren't really being hold back so much as some companies would like more government investment. As to file sharing, you are free to share your own files, but IP laws are a limitation. That is different than claiming that a conspiratorial decision has been made to use long term cancer therapy or death as a way to generate profits instead of providing a cure. Any company that could provide a general cure for cancer would crush the rest of the industry until the patent expired, and possibly after that.
When you say that "you've missed the article's point almost as much as the crank," you're missing that I was addressing that conspiracy theory. And my answer was in line with the article, namely that there are hard problems in medicine, and the issues you mention are part of it.
I'll meet you part way, here is a puzzler for you. See if you can track down and read this article: "The Best Medicine" - Roman military medicine was centuries ahead of its time .
Roman battlefield medicine was so advanced that after Rome fell it wasn't really equaled in some ways until the 20th Century. They were far better able to return men to health and fighting shape so that they could continue on as soldiers in service of the empire than pretty much any nation or empire for 1,600 years. Saving soldiers like that preserved fighting strength, retained highly skilled and experienced soldiers, and encouraged the soldiers to do their part in battle since they knew they would be taken care of. You would think there would be considerable interest in that from the military, so why didn't anyone else really equal that ancient empire until the last century?
It wasn't merely a question of technology and skill that allowed the Romans to do that, although that was important. There were issues of culture that played a significant role in developing their medical art. There was also a question of military organization and priorities involved. Try reading that article and then testing and filtering your ideas against it. Blaming a conspiracy is often the easy way out when the actual problem is much more complicated. Conspiracies do exist I grant you, but I don't think that is a good explanation for not curing cancer in a general way. Any company that could come up with a viable solution for that would stand a very good chance of crushing the rest of the industry, they would get all the profits until their patent expired.
we really have no idea
Surely what giraffe meat tastes like is still known to mankind; it's not like they're extinct or anything...
We're not done eating them yet. Anyone for seconds? ;)
No, what we were presented with is a conspiracy theory for which no evidence was given. If you want people to believe such an extraordinary claim, which would require a massive world-wide conspiracy lasting decades among all manner of countries, governments, and people of varying socio-political-religious orientations, you need to present some actual evidence instead of simply making a bare allegation. In short you are whining because a crank allegation with no supporting evidence was dismissed as such.
However, those two years have brought on voter registration laws designed to disenfranchise, laws so blatantly racist that it's pants-on-heads insane that anybody let them get away with it.
Voter turnout in Texas nearly doubles under new ID law
Minority turnout increased dramatically after Georgia voter-ID law
New Analysis Shows Voter Identification Laws Do Not Reduce Turnout
Voting fraud is an important question since so many elections are now decided by margins of victory less than the margin of fraud.
Al Franken May Have Won His Senate Seat Through Voter Fraud
Poor and minority votes seem especially vulnerable.
Poor and Disadvantaged are Most Likely to Have Their Vote Stolen
Officials Plead Guilty in New York Voter Fraud Case
Mississippi NAACP leader sent to prison for 10 counts of voter fraud
New York Investigators Obtain Fraudulent Ballots 97 Percent of Time
The “snowbird vote” takes wing
The simple reason is that the people who fund the research feel there is more profit in treating cancer than there ever would be in curing it.
That must be true since we know that there are no actual hard problems in medicine, science, math, or engineering. It's because of the oil companies that we don't have warp drive, antigravity, 500 mpg cars, and personal nuclear piles. The airlines, banks, and credit card companies are holding back time travel (no more late bills or missed flights). We have it on the authority of President Obama himself that surgeons do unnecessary surgery out of greed. Fermat's last theorem could have been solved hundreds of years ago except for the abacus and adding machine lobby. Shoe manufacturers are holding back personal jet packs since shoes would rarely wear out if you fly everywhere. And teacher's unions prevent people from learning foreign languages while they sleep, with one weird trick.
I have no idea where people get these ideas. Maybe food additives have something to do with it. Isn't hydrogenated-crank oil added to some foods? Or maybe it's just a problem due to chronic lack of sleep?
Sort of like plane crashes then? Should airlines stop taking measures against those?
Previous story: Ancient Nubians Drank Antibiotic-Laced Beer
A fair question. You have to look at the potential harm. The 1/40,000/year LOVEINT at NSA is, in the grander scheme of things, a relatively limited privacy invasion. There aren't any reports of actual identity theft, or other more serious harm, for example. On the other hand, there have been quite a number of terrorist plots that could have killed or wounded hundreds or even thousands per attack. The Boston Marathon attack was a minor plot and it cost about 17 people their limbs, killed others, and wounded many more. It was a significant disruption to a major cultural event for the city, and disruptive overall. You only have to look at the recent Volgograd attacks for another example, and even those were far smaller than a number of plots in the US. Just last month there was an attempted suicide car bomb attack at an airport in Kansas. That could have easily killed a hundred or more people. That really isn't the same sneaking a look at someone's love letter. Another thing to keep in mind is that a string of "successful" attacks would serve as a recruiting tool, and there would be more people volunteering for such attacks.
It will be interesting to see what happens next year.
Tornado activity hits 60-year low
2013 Atlantic hurricane season wrap-up: least active in 30 years