• 1

    posted a message on HR 347 bill bans protesting when government officials are present
    Quote from AramilTheElf

    No one mentioned race until you brought it up, so that's irrelevant. And it's OK to do that here too, in certain circumstances. If someone is shooting at a policeman, he doesn't say "Oh crap, he's an American citizen, I can't shoot back!". No, he saves his own life and the lives of others and shoots. If it's not reasonable to apprehend someone, and they are a risk to the lives of others, it is perfectly legal, ethically sound, and logic to make sure they can no longer be a risk to the lives of others.

    One of those things is not like the other. The Americans executed in Omega's example were not shooting at anybody when a bomb was dropped on their head. The hypothetical shooter in your example represents an immediate threat to the officer and others around him. If the suspect (and according to US law, everyone is a suspect until proven guilty) is not currently engaged in a lethal act, it is unreasonable to take leathal action against them. We don't go and shoot murder suspects just because they are assumed to have commited a murder. A citizen's rights are not suspended because they leave the country or commit a crime.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 3

    posted a message on Is this computer well made for gaming?I
    190 dollars for an optical drive? And it doesn't even write Blu-Ray? They must be marketed exclusively to morons.
    Posted in: Hardware & Software Support
  • 1

    posted a message on What were your thoughts about Mitt Romney?
    Quote from ryancarlson

    And the hand-picked group is the one that has the most knowledge about climate change. Climatologists are the one most likely to be right about climate change.

    Also this:

    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 1

    posted a message on Sandy Hook Elementary shooting
    Quote from odiedodi

    So what defines a hunting rifle?

    Presumably one that isn't scary.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 7

    posted a message on Sandy Hook Elementary shooting
    Quote from Nerevar

    This sort of scenario is a gray area. In a general scenario a gun is more dangerous than a knife. However I need to stress that the weapon isn't the issue here. Even if you were somehow able to remove weapons entirely, even from the hands of criminals, you'll still have the causes for that person's aggression, and people will be hurt or killed regardless. A gun is simply the easiest way to complete the job, but besides that what way is there? Makeshifts bombs you can Google the recipe for? Using a car and driving over people? Stabbings? Again, we need to look at the root of the issue and consider all the variables that lead to these sort of outcomes.

    People and certainly the media don't like doing that, though. I guess it requires too much effort, and it's just easier to blame the guns.

    Nobody's going to listen to you, you're too reasonable. I've tried going down the whole 'forget the tool and focus on the motive' road many times. People would much rather blame an inanimate object that try to discover and correct the underlying causes of these events.

    What happens when you take away guns? Murderers kill with knives. Like this guy who slashed 22 kids at a school in China. That's okay though, we can ignore it because knives are tools unlike those guns. Knives were designed to help people, while guns are only meant to kill. See, it's all about what the object was designed for, how it was used is irrelevant. No wait, that's backwards.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 2

    posted a message on The end of freedom in the U.S.A?
    Quote from FireroseNekowolf

    And frankly, I find most of it to be over-hyped. I don't support it, no, but we still haven't degraded into ­ing North Korea or some other horrific authoritarian regime. I mean for Christ sakes, Congress is broken to all hell, and you expect some massive usurpation of its citizens? See, here's the problem with all this ­. The sheer size of the US makes what kind of dystopia you're imagining as so ineffective to actually manage and oversee that it'd be a failure. It wouldn't last, it couldn't last. The cost and size of everything that'd be revolved around it would just be impossible. It'd cause a self-inflicted collapse.

    Yeah, sure, there are problems and they do need to be addressed, but it'd be idiotic to start stockpiling the ammunition and keeping an eye on the sky for the helicopters. You think this ­ is bad? You have no idea. We're still pretty well off in terms of freedom. ­, it was worse off back in the days of the Red Scare.

    Based on what you have said, I can say you clearly have no idea what I'm imagining, or expect. Still the fact remains that the police CAN and DO spy on citizens for no good reason and get away with it. It would be wise to stay vigilant, and call out affronts to our liberties as we see them. No country went from a free society to an oppressive one over night. They take small steps, then when the population gets used to that, they take more steps. I didn't say we have no rights at all, but our rights are clearly being limited in many areas. It would be naive to think that the US is immune to a decent into fascism.

    As far as stockpiling ammo, amongst other things, it's still a good idea. Some take it way too far, but take a look at Katrina, or Sandy. Don't you think people in those disasters would have been much better off if they had a couple weeks worth of food and other supplies ready to go?

    And just as a general rule, don't be so quick to judge people.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 13

    posted a message on The end of freedom in the U.S.A?
    We haven't completely lost all of our freedoms, but they are being eroded away.

    Freedom of speech
    Still alive, but look at what happens when people protest. They get met with riot police, pepper spray, rubber bullets and tear gas.

    Freedom to buy and sell what we wish
    Except for the things we can't. Things that are prohibited for no good reasons.

    Freedom to visit where we wish
    Freedom to move freely

    Car travel is still fine, but if you get on a plane, prepare to be microwaved or strip searched. Also try to visit Mexico without a passport. You used to be able to to that, no problem.

    Freedom to vote
    Voting is nice, but it doesn't accomplish much when both sides are owned by the same people.

    The US is quickly becoming a police state. The police can pretty much spy on you whenever they want. They can sit and monitor your house, scan it with infrared devices. They can grab your text and e-mail messages without a warrant. They have drones flying overhead, and cameras everywhere. The military can arrest anyone and detain them indefinitely on only a suspicion. This is not what a free country looks like. Not to me anyway.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 1

    posted a message on I am proud of you, USA
    Quote from AzemOcram

    I am just saying that marijuana impairs more.

    Depends on the individual's tolerance and dosage. Also, nicotine is definitely psychoactive.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 2

    posted a message on Amendment 64 Passes: Colorado Legalizes Marijuana For Recreational Use
    1) Cannabis has not been shown to kill brain cells. It may have a negative effect on the development of the brain however.

    2) Cannabis is not completely harmless. Smoking cannabis is linked to pulmonary diseases. It does not cause cancer however. The harms of smoking cannabis can be greatly reduced by vaporization and nullified by ingestion.

    3) No deaths have been directly linked to the consumption of cannabis. That means that you can't overdose and die from it. That does not mean nobody ever got too high to drive safely and ended up killing themselves or others.

    4) Cannabis may be an effective cancer treatment. Early research shows it can inhibit a tumor's ability to metastasize. It is also effective in the treatment of many other ailments.

    Sorry I didn't look up any sources, I'm being kinda lazy right now.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • 1

    posted a message on Large soft drinks are illegal but marijuana is now legalized?
    The prohibition of drugs is one of the worst policies we currently enforce. It's a waste of life, it's a waste of money. We have been steadily ramping up the war on drugs for 40 years and it has had very little effect on the availability of drugs in this country. It's time to wake up to reality and take control of the drug markets. Colorado and Washington have done a great thing by legalizing cannabis, and I hope the rest of the country soon follows.

    The ban on large beverages I'm indifferent to. I don't need to consume cups of sugar in a single sitting, much less the caffeine. Here's a thought, try water.
    Posted in: Politics, Philosophy, News and Science
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.