Of course, the whole game really is to make everyone guilty of something, thereby making it easier to control people as necessary.
Your point hadn't even occured that a bookstore that refuses to notify police of wanted "crminals" who get caught in the id sweep could become criminal.
The bookstore cited in the summary would not want to know about your speeding tichets.
Gun Stores already have to run an id check. If you have any outstanding warrants, I'm pretty sure they're obligated to notify the police right away. Now, if your local supermarket had to do this, too, wouldn't it be a huge convenience for the state?
If you're assuming that The People will be so angry as to up and establish reform and punish those responsible, I've got a bridge in the east river to sell ya'.
Considering the astounding number of people on Slashdot and Fark who insist citizens have greater constitutional/common law rights as opposed to visitors... godspeed, my friend.
If we make murder legal today, that doesn't mean we need to free yesterday's murderers from prison does it?
Um, yeah. That's exactly how it works. Ex post facto is funny like that. You can't convict someone for doing something that wasn't illegal before, but if a law is undone, the people convicted for it were wrongly imprisoned. They go free.
Supposedly happened in New York when the Rockerfeller Drug Laws were repealed, but they had to go through a (lengthy) appeals process and of course any crimes committed after that one still count.
All people should be allowed to break windows and throw their trash on the streets.
Their windows, sure. The streets are for the public; it's not theirs to litter. (They're free to litter on their property all they like).
Are you going to pay for that? Or the health bill caused by morbid obesity?
Um, why would we have to? Did the US implement some communist national health-care when I wasn't looking?
I was implying that while the bully can't convert it into money, getting unlimited stuff from the cafeteria every day for him and his friends 'aint a back racket.
All people should be allowed to get fat and develop health problems. Free will's a bitch, 'aint it?
Article is talking about a high school. These are kids, but they're 14 years old already -- well past the age everyone understands the difference between hamburgers and steamed broccoli.
Actually, it's even easier, considering the kid now has a card with anywhere from $20 to $200 on it. And if he's letting himself be bullied that hardcore, he'll likely consent to lying to his parents about where the extra money is going.
When your in school, you're already bound by what you can and can't say, write, hear and wear. That said, why not just serve only HEATHY food in the first place!!!
As long as the kids live at home, the parents should have a say in what the kids eat, what they wear and so on.
In the words of the Great Sage, Chris Rock, "Just because you can do something don't mean it's meant to be done."
The majority of fighting and angst by teenagers is definitely caused by their parents, who go batshit crazy trying to prevent... fighting and angst.
If there's no good reason to monitor what your kid eats (like they are both diabetic and completely devoid of self-control), parents need to chill the fuck out.
MealpayPlus doesn't charge for its system; it makes money on transaction fees when parents put money on kids' accounts.
If this is like some offices, you can't pay in case (article doesn't specify). Approach the counter without a card and you're just met by a queer look from the cashier.
The site says it's a flat $2.00 fee per transactions. Now you're torn between a 1% tax to give the kid a whopping $200 on the card (max) or a 10% tax if you just give them a benjamin every few days.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, the whole game really is to make everyone guilty of something, thereby making it easier to control people as necessary. Your point hadn't even occured that a bookstore that refuses to notify police of wanted "crminals" who get caught in the id sweep could become criminal.
If you didn't have to worry about being jailed/harassed for things that should not be illegal, then no.
The bookstore cited in the summary would not want to know about your speeding tichets.
Gun Stores already have to run an id check. If you have any outstanding warrants, I'm pretty sure they're obligated to notify the police right away. Now, if your local supermarket had to do this, too, wouldn't it be a huge convenience for the state?
And um, who will this hurt, again?
If you're assuming that The People will be so angry as to up and establish reform and punish those responsible, I've got a bridge in the east river to sell ya'.
Considering the astounding number of people on Slashdot and Fark who insist citizens have greater constitutional/common law rights as opposed to visitors... godspeed, my friend.
Rights are codified more to protect "bad people" than "good people."
Indeed, juries have no power to alter or comment on the law.
No given powers, but they have a de facto one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification. Learn it, love it.
Was actually availing yourself of music that 1) costs money and 2) is restricted.
You are, uh, aware there's mp3s out there on the internets?
Duh, talkshows are never aired live.
he could evade things better
Do a barrel roll?
I keep waiting for one of the the prostitutes to drop a Cloudsong, but it must be crazy rare or somethin...
If we make murder legal today, that doesn't mean we need to free yesterday's murderers from prison does it?
Um, yeah. That's exactly how it works. Ex post facto is funny like that. You can't convict someone for doing something that wasn't illegal before, but if a law is undone, the people convicted for it were wrongly imprisoned. They go free.
Supposedly happened in New York when the Rockerfeller Drug Laws were repealed, but they had to go through a (lengthy) appeals process and of course any crimes committed after that one still count.
While I don't agree with everything Parent says, it's a logical and well-reasoned arguement. Certainly not flamebait.
All people should be allowed to break windows and throw their trash on the streets.
Their windows, sure. The streets are for the public; it's not theirs to litter. (They're free to litter on their property all they like). Are you going to pay for that? Or the health bill caused by morbid obesity? Um, why would we have to? Did the US implement some communist national health-care when I wasn't looking?
I was implying that while the bully can't convert it into money, getting unlimited stuff from the cafeteria every day for him and his friends 'aint a back racket.
No, in general, it's caused by the teenager 'rebelling' against their parents ( ala: establishing their own identities ).
Establishing your own identity is a bad thing? What?
Controlling is not the same thing as suggesting.
All people should be allowed to get fat and develop health problems. Free will's a bitch, 'aint it?
Article is talking about a high school. These are kids, but they're 14 years old already -- well past the age everyone understands the difference between hamburgers and steamed broccoli.
Actually, it's even easier, considering the kid now has a card with anywhere from $20 to $200 on it. And if he's letting himself be bullied that hardcore, he'll likely consent to lying to his parents about where the extra money is going.
When your in school, you're already bound by what you can and can't say, write, hear and wear. That said, why not just serve only HEATHY food in the first place!!!
You have made a serious logical error here.
Situation A exists
Therefore, A is correct
As long as the kids live at home, the parents should have a say in what the kids eat, what they wear and so on.
In the words of the Great Sage, Chris Rock, "Just because you can do something don't mean it's meant to be done."
The majority of fighting and angst by teenagers is definitely caused by their parents, who go batshit crazy trying to prevent... fighting and angst.
If there's no good reason to monitor what your kid eats (like they are both diabetic and completely devoid of self-control), parents need to chill the fuck out.
MealpayPlus doesn't charge for its system; it makes money on transaction fees when parents put money on kids' accounts.
If this is like some offices, you can't pay in case (article doesn't specify). Approach the counter without a card and you're just met by a queer look from the cashier.
The site says it's a flat $2.00 fee per transactions. Now you're torn between a 1% tax to give the kid a whopping $200 on the card (max) or a 10% tax if you just give them a benjamin every few days.
Now they've just degenerated to "fuck you niggers, try and stop us!"
How long is it before Ballmer is just throwing his money at people to get them to wallow in the mud on the side of the road?
Your policy would undermine democracy and the ability of individuals citizens to have any influence on the legislative process.
Oh, but they would. As a jury during the douchebag's trial.
What's a guy that doesn't even consider himself paranoid to think of the current state of affairs?
Maybe those crazy guys with exploding vests have a point.