no, because law enforcement is mostly pro-gun too. They just dont want shit-bags to have it. If they are forced to go door to door what your going to find is 'bait' houses set up for searches. and when 10 or 12 cops are digging through the house... BOOM! the whole fucking house explodes with 12 dead cops and all their canines, etc. The next 12 cops will be less likely to be so anxious to search another house. After about 50 or 60 of these incidents, they will stop searching houses and just pretend like they rounded them all up.
So, you're recommending terrorism and killing members of law enforcement. I guess this is how the NRA and Second Amendment "activists" have gotten their reputation.
That is a last resort and to take that from responsible gun owners is crazy. If I wasn't home, I would want my wife to have access to a gun because while she waits for the cops, she would be otherwise defenseless.
Get a dog. It will make you safer than owning a gun will, and won't make you more likely to commit suicide or kill a family member.
If you have a dog, that home intruder won't even try to come into your house. Bad guys avoid dogs, but they look to steal guns
A gun in the house increases the risk to your family.
The right to believe in whatever god you want. The right to think whatever you like. The right to feel however you feel. The right to retain your own vital organs, even if harvesting them could save the lives of two or more other people. The right to be a retired Liberal Arts professor on slashdot that pretends he understands politics, law, technology, and science.
"Natural rights" is a specific term of art. It's not a list of things you pull out of your ass (although you have the natural right to pull them out of your ass, within limits).
As I said, all natural rights come with common sense controls.
If that many people can have their guns taken from them without them even knowing it...
Without even knowing it... What a load of crap. How in hell do you think it's known they are stolen? Flunk English 101 and logic?
So, are you trying to say that their guns are being taken from them...at gunpoint?
Or are their houses/vehicles being burglarized? If it's the latter then it's definitely happening without them knowing about it. Maybe they found out about it later, but they didn't know when it was happening. Either way, guns don't appear to be that effective for security, do they?
Anyone for "common sense" speech controls? You're not against "common sense" are you?
We already have common sense speech controls, For example, libel, slander, obscenity, fighting words, and commercial speech have never been protected by the First Amendment, and we have various laws against all of those. There is not a single "natural right" that has not historically come with "common sense controls". Not one.
How do you plan to round up the 300-500 million firearms already in civilian hands?
Little by little. There are millions of guns seized by police or collected via buyback programs across the US every year.
How many deaths & injuries are you willing to accept for the required door to door searches in order to adequately search the 3.80 million square miles that is the US?
There are 600,000 guns that are stolen every year in the US. If that many people can have their guns taken from them without them even knowing it, then I'm pretty sure law enforcement can manage.
There's no need to confiscate guns. Just create a set of gun laws similar to Israel and watch the problem solve itself. Guns in Israel are tightly controlled and carefully tracked by the state. Sure you have a right to bear arms, but you've got to accept responsibilities if you plan to exercise it. Just like any other "natural right".
Yes, it's Trump playing 36-dimensional Cosmic Brain Chess. The only problem is now my Nobel Prize bracket is all shot to hell, and those thousands of commemorative coins that Cheetolf Twitler had the Mint create are going to end up as collectors items sold on QVC.
It is actually requiring women NOT to have sex with a specific man
I have a question: Who the fuck are you or Jordan Peterson to be "requiring" any woman to have or not have sex with anyone? Women are not a commodity who owe you sex (or not). Until you get that through your head, you won't be having any sex.
What did your parents do so wrong to make you and other incels the way that you are?
No, he didn't demand it. He did something much worse: he excused it. He tried to create an intellectual and moral framework where such a demand is something natural instead of sociopathic. Fortunately, he lacks the intellectual firepower to do either and just made a fool of himself.,
"Recently, a young man named Alek Minassian drove through Toronto trying to kill people with his van. Ten were killed, and he has been charged with first-degree murder for their deaths, and with attempted murder for 16 people who were injured. Mr. Minassian declared himself to be part of a misogynist group whose members call themselves incels. The term is short for “involuntary celibates,” though the group has evolved into a male supremacist movement made up of people — some celibate, some not — who believe that women should be treated as sexual objects with few rights. Some believe in forced “sexual redistribution,” in which a governing body would intervene in women’s lives to force them into sexual relationships.
Violent attacks are what happens when men do not have partners, Mr. Peterson says, and society needs to work to make sure those men are married.
“He was angry at God because women were rejecting him,” Mr. Peterson says of the Toronto killer. “The cure for that is enforced monogamy. That’s actually why monogamy emerges.""
Did they ever release any actual evidence the Russians hacked the DNC?
Mueller's investigation has been almost entirely without leaks, but it was learned that Guccifer 2.0 did in fact slip up and failed to activate his VPN client and exposed himself as being a particular GRU officer who was working out of the agency’s headquarters on Grizodubovoy Street in Moscow. This is a fact that is now accepted across the political spectrum.
Even the sitting President's own lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is now working from the talking points that say that the Russian interference in the election (including the hack) was a "gift" from Russia and so it's not collusion.
"Giuliani initially disputed the notion that Trump’s daily citing, in the final month of his campaign, of Russian-aligned WikiLeaks and its release of Russian-stolen emails constituted “colluding” with Russia.
“It is not,” Giuliani said.
Then he switched tacks.
“OK, and if it is, it isn’t illegal... It was sort of like a gift,” he said. “And you’re not involved in the illegality of getting it.”
Citation of a specific, direct, demand with a threat please.
Since you said, "please", here you go:
Elliot Rodger, the Isla Vista killer, uploaded a video to YouTube about his “retribution” against attractive women who wouldn’t sleep with him (and the attractive men they would sleep with) before killing six people in 2014.
"One might plausibly argue that those with much less access to sex suffer to a similar degree as those with low income, and might similarly hope to gain from organizing around this identity, to lobby for redistribution along this axis and to at least implicitly threaten violence if their demands are not met. As with income inequality, most folks concerned about sex inequality might explicitly reject violence as a method, at least for now, and yet still be encouraged privately when the possibility of violence helps move others to support their policies. (Sex could be directly redistributed, or cash might be redistributed in compensation.)"
But really, the demand for sex with a threat of violence has been a tool of losers and incels for millennia:
Actually, it's fucking brilliant. Sauce for the goose. In declaring Trump's part of twitter a government forum in order to ban Trump blocking people they have also created the argument for preventing Twitter itself from doing the same.
I'm not so sure. Twitter treats accounts of public officials and government agencies different from other accounts.
Also, saying what a Twitter user can do is different than saying what Twitter can do.
Second, even if you find the above completely unconvincing, given that Slashdot has room for around ten stories or so a day, deciding that one of the top ten news-for-nerds/stuff-that-matters is a satellite launch seems pretty reasonable.
OK, you've convinced me. I'm nothing if not a reasonable guy.
Now can we please get back to talking about SJWs and how women and immigrants shouldn't be in tech jobs before Elon does something else notable like scratch his heinie?
Slashdot Mirror
So, you're recommending terrorism and killing members of law enforcement. I guess this is how the NRA and Second Amendment "activists" have gotten their reputation.
Thank you for making that clear.
Get a dog. It will make you safer than owning a gun will, and won't make you more likely to commit suicide or kill a family member.
If you have a dog, that home intruder won't even try to come into your house. Bad guys avoid dogs, but they look to steal guns
A gun in the house increases the risk to your family.
https://academic.oup.com/aje/a...
https://www.scientificamerican...
https://www.vox.com/cards/gun-...
"Natural rights" is a specific term of art. It's not a list of things you pull out of your ass (although you have the natural right to pull them out of your ass, within limits).
As I said, all natural rights come with common sense controls.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18t...
So, are you trying to say that their guns are being taken from them...at gunpoint?
Or are their houses/vehicles being burglarized? If it's the latter then it's definitely happening without them knowing about it. Maybe they found out about it later, but they didn't know when it was happening. Either way, guns don't appear to be that effective for security, do they?
This has absolutely nothing to do with the $500,000,000.00 that a Chinese government bank just poured into a failing Trump property in Indonesia.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
No quid pro quo. You're the quid pro quo.
We already have common sense speech controls, For example, libel, slander, obscenity, fighting words, and commercial speech have never been protected by the First Amendment, and we have various laws against all of those. There is not a single "natural right" that has not historically come with "common sense controls". Not one.
Little by little. There are millions of guns seized by police or collected via buyback programs across the US every year.
There are 600,000 guns that are stolen every year in the US. If that many people can have their guns taken from them without them even knowing it, then I'm pretty sure law enforcement can manage.
There's no need to confiscate guns. Just create a set of gun laws similar to Israel and watch the problem solve itself. Guns in Israel are tightly controlled and carefully tracked by the state. Sure you have a right to bear arms, but you've got to accept responsibilities if you plan to exercise it. Just like any other "natural right".
Well, at least this article got me thinking about cockroach tiddies, which is a first.
Why do you libs have to make everything about the President?
No.
Yes, it's Trump playing 36-dimensional Cosmic Brain Chess. The only problem is now my Nobel Prize bracket is all shot to hell, and those thousands of commemorative coins that Cheetolf Twitler had the Mint create are going to end up as collectors items sold on QVC.
I have a question: Who the fuck are you or Jordan Peterson to be "requiring" any woman to have or not have sex with anyone? Women are not a commodity who owe you sex (or not). Until you get that through your head, you won't be having any sex.
What did your parents do so wrong to make you and other incels the way that you are?
No, he didn't demand it. He did something much worse: he excused it. He tried to create an intellectual and moral framework where such a demand is something natural instead of sociopathic. Fortunately, he lacks the intellectual firepower to do either and just made a fool of himself.,
https://washingtonmonthly.com/...
Mueller's investigation has been almost entirely without leaks, but it was learned that Guccifer 2.0 did in fact slip up and failed to activate his VPN client and exposed himself as being a particular GRU officer who was working out of the agency’s headquarters on Grizodubovoy Street in Moscow. This is a fact that is now accepted across the political spectrum.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/...
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/...
Even the sitting President's own lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, is now working from the talking points that say that the Russian interference in the election (including the hack) was a "gift" from Russia and so it's not collusion.
Look elsewhere in the thread. I've already supplied citations.
Since you said, "please", here you go:
Elliot Rodger, the Isla Vista killer, uploaded a video to YouTube about his “retribution” against attractive women who wouldn’t sleep with him (and the attractive men they would sleep with) before killing six people in 2014.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
And this is directly from Robin Hanson's blog:
But really, the demand for sex with a threat of violence has been a tool of losers and incels for millennia:
https://forward.com/schmooze/4...
If none of that satisfies you, I would direct you to the /incel section of 4chan or reddit.
Asking for nude photos to prevent nude photos from being posted is the second most audacious demand on the internet recently.
The first one was when incels and Jordan Peterson demanded that women have sex with them to prevent mass murders.
I'm not so sure. Twitter treats accounts of public officials and government agencies different from other accounts.
Also, saying what a Twitter user can do is different than saying what Twitter can do.
I've been hit with the massive woosh. My deepest apologies.
Dude, "being questioned by" is not the same as "worked with".
Counterpoint: Neil Young was absolutely right about Alabama.
Jesus Christ, man. That song didn't have anything to do with Neil Young. Are we getting too old to keep our musical references straight.
OK, you've convinced me. I'm nothing if not a reasonable guy.
Now can we please get back to talking about SJWs and how women and immigrants shouldn't be in tech jobs before Elon does something else notable like scratch his heinie?
I make my own chances to complain. I'm a self-starter in that regard.
It's 20 fucking 18. Is putting a satellite into orbit really headline news?
I can't wait until the first hyperloop so we can have the headline, "Elon Musk Invents the Subway".