They were restricted prior to the ban, in similar ways that the current guns are restricted now. I personally knew someone who I went airgun shooting with who had his guns in a normal house in a normal suburb.
You weren't allowed to carry, that was always a difference.
There were about the same number of deaths in the UK from handguns when they were legal to own 20 years ago. The estimated total number of guns, legal and illegal, held by civilians in the United Kingdom is over four million. That's one for every 15 people or so. The majority of these are legally owned.
Except that in the UK, the ban -- which they take very, very seriously -- actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
Handguns were banned in 1997, and the years following the ban saw an increase in violent crime involving handguns. The handgun crime rate now is about the same as before the ban.
Interestingly, there are some automatic rifles that are technically legal in the UK that are illegal in the US for private citizens. Good luck getting a license for them, though. High powered non-automatic rifles and shotguns are still very much legal in the UK, there are currently over half a million valid shotgun licenses alone in the UK. You can have been in prison for 3 years, and still get a shotgun license.
That's pretty easy - pink/brown gills. I'm far from experienced, but I do pick and eat Agaricus campestris and/or arvensis (the field and horse mushrooms). If it's got brown gills, and looks like a normal mushroom, I'll eat it. The only common mushroom that is slightly poisonous like this is the yellow stainer, but this will stain yellow when cut (some people do eat these too, though). There are others that are poisonous, but they're rare, also stain yellow and smell and taste bad. If it's got brown gills, it might make you sick, but it won't do you long term damage.
If it's got white gills, or is too immature to have gills, I leave it be. I wouldn't trust an app to identify mushrooms.
Ok... your lack of belief in your god defines you just as much as your lack of belief in invisible pink teapots defines you, is that better?
Me not believing in something is not a faith.
ps. I'm not a militant atheist, I was raised C of E, and still go to some services (I feel a little hypocritical praying, so I don't, but I do sing). I don't believe in any kind of christian god though. I don't believe in lots of things, god is just one of them.
Also... it was over 15 Celsius (60 Fahrenheit or so) just before Christmas in London. A couple of years ago it hardly got above freezing throughout December. We're used to odd weather because of where the UK is.
We all know this, but somehow this knowledge flies out the window when it comes to our intuitions about what a warming globe means.
No... it's perfect common sense. If the global temperature increases by one degree, the the local temperature will probably increase by about one degree.
If the local temperature decreased by one degree with one degree global warming (with the rest of the world warming by one degree) somewhere else equivalent in the world would have to increase by three degrees. I know this is possible, however I do believe it to be less likely.
Also, if you want to compare cities at similar latitudes, London is further north than Winnipeg, and both are a lot further north than Odessa in the Ukraine. It's common knowledge in the UK that the continent south of us is generally a lot colder in the winter. Denver's further south than Madrid and Istanbul...
From where I sit, I see the Atheists as having very little difference from the religious. They both want to believe adopting a set of beliefs will make them better people and allow them to shed guilt from being asshats.
My lack of belief in your god defines me just as much as your lack of belief in invisible pink teapots defines you.
Maybe I'm just showing my age (OK, downhill side of 50), but it seems to me that just about any whitegoods type of appliance these days is made to such shoddy standards, it would be pretty much impossible to attribute failure to vandalism on anyone's part.
They're that much cheaper and better at what they do that they're still better value for money, even if they have a quarter the lifespan. However, they don't have worse lifespans - you're looking back with rose tinted spectacles.
Repairing any kind of white good costs manpower, and is now almost always not worth it if it is anything more than a simple repair. Manpower used to be much cheaper, and white goods used to be much more expensive, so repairing them used to be economically viable.
It's not that they've got less reliable, it's that the cost of repairing stuff has gone up, and the cost of new stuff has gone down. It's no wonder more get scrapped quicker when this happens.
I was thinking this - I generally read at a little over 1 page per minute (obviously it depends on the typescript, and how challenging and convoluted the page is). 72 page is an hour.
Yes.... I know that. I also know that both London and Yorkshire have a higher population than Scotland. However, this doesn't explain why it is often cheaper to phone Australia than it is to phone anyone on a mobile.
The distance between England and Australia is close to as big as it gets on the earth.
Land line providers charge extra for long distance.
This is one of the biggest differences between the US and most other places in the world. I'm 36, from the UK, and remember long distance charges on landlines, but only just. Now just about all national calls from a landline are essentially free.
Calling mobiles from landlines used to be horrendously expensive (almost 50p a minute IIRC). This is how mobile companies made a whole load of their money - charging others to phone them. Now it's a little better, but the mobile companies still massively profit from calls from landlines.
International landline calls used to be expensive... now they're cheap. It's cheaper to call Australia from your landline than it is to call the mobile next to you in the UK in most cases.
The BBC had a programme tracking ospreys a while back. A couple of them just flew to completely unexpected places (more than 500 miles from where they were expected), the more normal ones were much more random than expected too. No one could really figure out why they flew to the places they did when they did.
Had there been some kind of problem where the ospreys were not, it would have been all to easy to assign knowledge to the Ospreys.
Also, as I said above : Plenty of animals do get killed in natural disasters, migratory birds are _very_ affected by storms.
The trouble with stories like this is that animals do a whole host of stuff that we cannot explain, and we connect it to events that happen after the fact.
Situation 1 : Lots of animals are running somewhere. Nothing happens.... they must have just been spooked by something random.
Situation 2 : Lots of animals are running somewhere. There's a tsunami/earthquake/tornado.... they must have known something we don't.
Finding that some animals behave in an odd, unexplained way just before a major natural disaster isn't news - Animals behave in an odd, unexplained way all the time.
There has been lots of genuine research into animal behaviour to try and predict major natural disasters, nearly all of which has been fruitless. Many animals are killed by natural disasters.
Now, if someone actually predicted a natural disaster by using animal behaviour, that might be interesting. Saying that the animals acted weird just before, when looking back, is suspect.
Of course Apple had _some_ DRM free titles by 2007, everyone did. Selling a small portion of your catalogue DRM free is not very useful for me. I don't want to have to check which DRM is on which song.
In 2007, Apple was selling EMI (and EMI only) music DRM free at additional cost. By January 2008, Amazon sold everything DRM free. Apple went DRM free in 2009. Google Fairplay.
This cases has been cited by a more relevant one, Gonzales v. Reich which was about the right to grow your own marijuana in states in which it is legal to use it medicinally : "The government also contended that consuming one's locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate—and prohibit—such consumption."
In addition, DRM is good for consumers because it ensures that studios will be willing to publish more than zero desirable works in a format.
You seem to forget that studios _have_ to be willing to publish in a format that people will use. The studios being "willing" to publish is irrelevant. If they try to publish works in a format no one uses, they lose their revenue stream. Their entire business model is having as many people as possible buy the content.
I personally started buying music online a few years back. I didn't want DRM.
I've spent probably a few hundred pounds with Amazon, just because when I started buying music online they were the place to offer DRM free. Apple lost me as a customer because of DRM.
Of course, for men who are circumcised and so who already lost most of their ability to feel what sex is (because of thicker and less sensitive skin as well as no foreskin movement), it doesn't matter much
How on earth would you know what a circumcised man can feel during sex? Do you have any experience of this, or are you just making assumptions?
Technically, a "Lingua Franca" is a language used by two people whose first language is something else entirely. I, for example, can't use English as a Lingua Franca, since it's my first language. I have, however, spoken to a Spanish person (who could not speak English) in French, therefore was using French as a kind of Lingua Franca.
The original Lingua Franca was a trading language used around the Mediterranean from about 1000 years ago, and was originally based predominantly on northern Italian dialects. The term has been applied to other languages like Latin retroactively.
Chinese doesn't even have a word for "no", to give you an idea of how fundamentally different it is.
The "Do not want" meme was caused by the Chinese lack of the word "no" - See here or here for one of my all time favourite things. It makes the new Star Wars films watchable.
Slashdot Mirror
They were restricted prior to the ban, in similar ways that the current guns are restricted now. I personally knew someone who I went airgun shooting with who had his guns in a normal house in a normal suburb.
You weren't allowed to carry, that was always a difference.
There were about the same number of deaths in the UK from handguns when they were legal to own 20 years ago. The estimated total number of guns, legal and illegal, held by civilians in the United Kingdom is over four million. That's one for every 15 people or so. The majority of these are legally owned.
Except that in the UK, the ban -- which they take very, very seriously -- actually DOES result in significantly less gun violence.
Handguns were banned in 1997, and the years following the ban saw an increase in violent crime involving handguns. The handgun crime rate now is about the same as before the ban.
Interestingly, there are some automatic rifles that are technically legal in the UK that are illegal in the US for private citizens. Good luck getting a license for them, though. High powered non-automatic rifles and shotguns are still very much legal in the UK, there are currently over half a million valid shotgun licenses alone in the UK. You can have been in prison for 3 years, and still get a shotgun license.
That's pretty easy - pink/brown gills. I'm far from experienced, but I do pick and eat Agaricus campestris and/or arvensis (the field and horse mushrooms). If it's got brown gills, and looks like a normal mushroom, I'll eat it. The only common mushroom that is slightly poisonous like this is the yellow stainer, but this will stain yellow when cut (some people do eat these too, though). There are others that are poisonous, but they're rare, also stain yellow and smell and taste bad. If it's got brown gills, it might make you sick, but it won't do you long term damage.
If it's got white gills, or is too immature to have gills, I leave it be. I wouldn't trust an app to identify mushrooms.
Ok... your lack of belief in your god defines you just as much as your lack of belief in invisible pink teapots defines you, is that better?
Me not believing in something is not a faith.
ps. I'm not a militant atheist, I was raised C of E, and still go to some services (I feel a little hypocritical praying, so I don't, but I do sing). I don't believe in any kind of christian god though. I don't believe in lots of things, god is just one of them.
Also... it was over 15 Celsius (60 Fahrenheit or so) just before Christmas in London. A couple of years ago it hardly got above freezing throughout December. We're used to odd weather because of where the UK is.
We all know this, but somehow this knowledge flies out the window when it comes to our intuitions about what a warming globe means.
No... it's perfect common sense. If the global temperature increases by one degree, the the local temperature will probably increase by about one degree.
If the local temperature decreased by one degree with one degree global warming (with the rest of the world warming by one degree) somewhere else equivalent in the world would have to increase by three degrees. I know this is possible, however I do believe it to be less likely.
Also, if you want to compare cities at similar latitudes, London is further north than Winnipeg, and both are a lot further north than Odessa in the Ukraine. It's common knowledge in the UK that the continent south of us is generally a lot colder in the winter. Denver's further south than Madrid and Istanbul...
From where I sit, I see the Atheists as having very little difference from the religious. They both want to believe adopting a set of beliefs will make them better people and allow them to shed guilt from being asshats.
My lack of belief in your god defines me just as much as your lack of belief in invisible pink teapots defines you.
Maybe I'm just showing my age (OK, downhill side of 50), but it seems to me that just about any whitegoods type of appliance these days is made to such shoddy standards, it would be pretty much impossible to attribute failure to vandalism on anyone's part.
They're that much cheaper and better at what they do that they're still better value for money, even if they have a quarter the lifespan. However, they don't have worse lifespans - you're looking back with rose tinted spectacles.
Repairing any kind of white good costs manpower, and is now almost always not worth it if it is anything more than a simple repair. Manpower used to be much cheaper, and white goods used to be much more expensive, so repairing them used to be economically viable.
It's not that they've got less reliable, it's that the cost of repairing stuff has gone up, and the cost of new stuff has gone down. It's no wonder more get scrapped quicker when this happens.
I was thinking this - I generally read at a little over 1 page per minute (obviously it depends on the typescript, and how challenging and convoluted the page is). 72 page is an hour.
It's actually a tragedy and missed opportunity, that Jackson has so little talent as a director, and so little discipline in telling a story.
Spoken by somebody who has never seen "Meet the Feebles".
Yes.... I know that. I also know that both London and Yorkshire have a higher population than Scotland. However, this doesn't explain why it is often cheaper to phone Australia than it is to phone anyone on a mobile.
The distance between England and Australia is close to as big as it gets on the earth.
Land line providers charge extra for long distance.
This is one of the biggest differences between the US and most other places in the world. I'm 36, from the UK, and remember long distance charges on landlines, but only just. Now just about all national calls from a landline are essentially free.
Calling mobiles from landlines used to be horrendously expensive (almost 50p a minute IIRC). This is how mobile companies made a whole load of their money - charging others to phone them. Now it's a little better, but the mobile companies still massively profit from calls from landlines.
International landline calls used to be expensive... now they're cheap. It's cheaper to call Australia from your landline than it is to call the mobile next to you in the UK in most cases.
Finding out the exact charges is difficult.
That an orangutan will not try to eat you. Chimps can and will.
An orangutan may try and rape you, though.
I understand that.
The BBC had a programme tracking ospreys a while back. A couple of them just flew to completely unexpected places (more than 500 miles from where they were expected), the more normal ones were much more random than expected too. No one could really figure out why they flew to the places they did when they did.
Had there been some kind of problem where the ospreys were not, it would have been all to easy to assign knowledge to the Ospreys.
Also, as I said above : Plenty of animals do get killed in natural disasters, migratory birds are _very_ affected by storms.
The trouble with stories like this is that animals do a whole host of stuff that we cannot explain, and we connect it to events that happen after the fact.
Situation 1 : Lots of animals are running somewhere. Nothing happens.... they must have just been spooked by something random.
Situation 2 : Lots of animals are running somewhere. There's a tsunami/earthquake/tornado.... they must have known something we don't.
Finding that some animals behave in an odd, unexplained way just before a major natural disaster isn't news - Animals behave in an odd, unexplained way all the time.
There has been lots of genuine research into animal behaviour to try and predict major natural disasters, nearly all of which has been fruitless. Many animals are killed by natural disasters.
Now, if someone actually predicted a natural disaster by using animal behaviour, that might be interesting. Saying that the animals acted weird just before, when looking back, is suspect.
Of course Apple had _some_ DRM free titles by 2007, everyone did. Selling a small portion of your catalogue DRM free is not very useful for me. I don't want to have to check which DRM is on which song.
In 2007, Apple was selling EMI (and EMI only) music DRM free at additional cost. By January 2008, Amazon sold everything DRM free. Apple went DRM free in 2009. Google Fairplay.
This cases has been cited by a more relevant one, Gonzales v. Reich which was about the right to grow your own marijuana in states in which it is legal to use it medicinally : "The government also contended that consuming one's locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate—and prohibit—such consumption."
Anonymous phones exist in the UK. You don't have to give any (true) information to get a pay as you go phone.
In addition, DRM is good for consumers because it ensures that studios will be willing to publish more than zero desirable works in a format.
You seem to forget that studios _have_ to be willing to publish in a format that people will use. The studios being "willing" to publish is irrelevant. If they try to publish works in a format no one uses, they lose their revenue stream. Their entire business model is having as many people as possible buy the content.
I personally started buying music online a few years back. I didn't want DRM.
I've spent probably a few hundred pounds with Amazon, just because when I started buying music online they were the place to offer DRM free. Apple lost me as a customer because of DRM.
they blocked and non-apple DRM like every other company out there and Real had to hack it.
Is this supposed to be a sentence? If so, I don't know what it means, at all. I'm speaking literally here.
but in the end itunes allowed you to use any hardware you wanted as long as the maker coded to a few of apple's API's.
I can just about understand this sentence, I think.
Of course, for men who are circumcised and so who already lost most of their ability to feel what sex is (because of thicker and less sensitive skin as well as no foreskin movement), it doesn't matter much
How on earth would you know what a circumcised man can feel during sex? Do you have any experience of this, or are you just making assumptions?
Technically, a "Lingua Franca" is a language used by two people whose first language is something else entirely. I, for example, can't use English as a Lingua Franca, since it's my first language. I have, however, spoken to a Spanish person (who could not speak English) in French, therefore was using French as a kind of Lingua Franca.
The original Lingua Franca was a trading language used around the Mediterranean from about 1000 years ago, and was originally based predominantly on northern Italian dialects. The term has been applied to other languages like Latin retroactively.
Chinese doesn't even have a word for "no", to give you an idea of how fundamentally different it is.
The "Do not want" meme was caused by the Chinese lack of the word "no" - See here or here for one of my all time favourite things. It makes the new Star Wars films watchable.