Except for that whole chattel slavery thing.
Egypt: Electorate votes for a parliament. Military dissolves parliament. Electorate votes for a president. Military controls who's on the cabinet.
Government was never overthrown except for some figurehead who looks like he was about to die anyway.
True, we changed from chattel slavery of one race to wage slavery of all races.
Hard to put on a party hat about that one.
That's funny. Marx did.
Marx was born 100 or 200 years too early.
If he was born today, by the time he's an adult stateless communism could actually work.
Depends on how quickly we decide to get our act together as a species.
Well, we'll see.
I believe we have 11 years until you hit 40, right?
Unless there is also a Stalin...
Yep.
51ish years for the scientists to figure out this whole immortality thing, assuming I live to average age.
Well, I meant until you hit 40 and capitalism was replaced. As you predicted in a different thread.
If we get socialism and personal immortality by then, well, you will have every right to say "I told you so."
I think Stalin was more an effect of trying to adapt Communism to Russia's economy at the time.
He was pragmatic to a fault... and then also crazy.
Remember, every dictator in the world wasn't born that way, they are a unique combination of genetics and circumstance.
History's worse despots could have been very different people had they been born in a different time or place.
Russia made Stalin as much as Stalin made Russia.
Well, I meant until you hit 40 and capitalism was replaced. As you predicted in a different thread.
If we get socialism and personal immortality by then, well, you will have every right to say "I told you so."
I think my prediction was that capitalism will fail. I have no idea if it's going to be replaced.
It already failed once in 1929 and we've kept it on life support ever since, so for all I know when it fails again we'll call a necromancer instead of a mortician.
And I don't think we'd replace it with socialism.
Socialism and communism are 18th century concepts that won't necessarily work well with the world of 2020+.
We need an entirely new way of looking at economics.
[Clears throat]
If capitalism fails (definitively--it fails a lot, actually, it just keeps getting back up) and we get personal immortality in the next 11 years, then you can say "I told you so."
How about I just throw a party so we can all celebrate?
I would imagine being immortal would very much change the entire way you look at things, and the petty vindication of an "I told you so" would mean so little.
But you have to bring the cake to the party.
How about I just throw a party so we can all celebrate?
I would imagine being immortal would very much change the entire way you look at things, and the petty vindication of an "I told you so" would mean so little.
But you have to bring the cake to the party.
On the other hand, maybe immortality for our petty personalities will result in nanotech-enabled murder of immortals over who gets to say "I told you so"; that's how we'll roll on the Dice estate.
Maybe I'm just abnormally easy going.
I'd be so excited about being immortal I probably wouldn't even have time to speak to other people for at least a century.
Imagine there being no such thing as "wasted time".
How relaxed would you be?
It'd be like not giving a s#@* brought to a whole new level.
cough-cough-Tuck Everlasting-cough
Huh. Now those references on The Movie Game thread make sense.
[scurries over to Netflix]
Remember, every dictator in the world wasn't born that way, they are a unique combination of genetics and circumstance.
It is a matter of choice. Genetics don´t play a role in that (I don´t believe that there is "dictator gene"), and circumstance is just a cheap excuse. Everybody has the potential to become a bloodthirsty dictator or a saint.
|
Forced, reversible sterilization isn't necessarily a bad idea Lincoln.
Make breeding licensed, make the licensed based on as close to an objective set of criteria as possible, such as IQ, financial stability, personal education level etc. Avoid rulings based on ideology/religion etc.
Kind of prove you can raise a kid before you're allowed to have one.
Not to mention this allows us better control over the human genome so that we can fix it without the possibility of unsanctioned breeding ruining things.
We could finally wipe stuff like MS, CP, etc out of our genes without having to kill anyone.
And we could create a human race devoid of the mental components of crime and violence.
Imagine a human race with a genetic aversion to greed or want of material objects. With an internal revulsion to violence.
Then we won't need gun control as no one would want a gun.
Obviously this leaves us a little open for attack if some alien species were bumbling through the universe, so we could keep a genetic profile on hand of the opposite.
Genetically engineered humanist soldiers.
Most of the world's problems can be fixed by simply fixing the humans in the world, not trying to control the tools they use to commit harm.
|
No, and you're demonstrating exactly why we can't do that.
"a known Neo-Nazi with criminal history"
Do you have anything for a "Criminal history" other than drunk driving? CNN not that long ago said there was nothing in his record that would have kept him from legally buying the gun.
You don' want him to have a gun because he's a racist nazi. While that's more than understandable, giving a segment of the population the power to declare people they disagree with crazy and take away their rights has never gone well. Its blatantly unconstitutional.
By all means, ban pistols (or treat them the way we do machine guns) but you can't just outsource a constitutional violation to a non governmental segment of the population with a degree and think that somehow makes it ok.
Actually a licensed psychiatric clinician is by definition not a non-governmental segment of the population.
And drunk driving is generally a felony, so...
|
|
I have to wonder why my position is knee jerk but an obvious reaction to a tragedy is not. I've advocated more or less banning pistols before, so I'm not exactly the NRA poster boy here.
EDIT: I actually think the OP's proposition is a fine idea. I also think that a knee-jerk opposition to it on grounds of personal liberty isn't completely insane. I sometimes wonder if I'm the only guy who thinks that we'll never stop all bad things, but that some restrictions are also good.
I don't even want to ban pistols.
As a society we take guns away from people for far less that the fact that they are so crazy a doctor reported them to the police. Many states standard probation includes firearms restriction, even for misdemeanors, and most judges will restrict access prior to adjudication if there is any concern.
If we want to require a judge to sign off, I can tell you from my experience in the courts that will be an easy rubber stamp if any psychologist gives even an inkling of concern.
Add in an appeal process and let's make this so.
I don't think mental health professionals should be able to flag anyone unless they can correctly spell the word "psychiatric."Hey, I didn't say I should get to flag anyone :)
Hee hee!
It was a low blow, I admit, but I need a higher post count for the Burgomeister.
I hate how it says Doodlebug Anklebiter aka Comrade Anklebiter. That's lame and repetitious. But if it said DA aka the Burgomeister of Troll Town, that would be the shiznit!!
And since you were so reasonable about the last one:
If we want to require a judge to sign off, I can tell you from my experience in the courts that will be an easy rubber stamp if any psychologist gives even an inkling of concern.
Add in an appeal process and let's make this so.
Sounds good to me.
So, what, we collect signatures and turn them into Liz Courts?
|
|
Also, still not keen on this "Psych says you're not stable enough, you go on a watchlist" nonsense.
In most states and countries, a psychiatrist can have you held temporarily (and apply for a court order to extend that indefinitely) if you are deemed "a danger to yourself or others".
Is it really to much of a stretch to have a lesser standard, still with court protections and an appeal process, where they can let you go but get you from buying guns?
Or should they just lock you up instead, since that's apparently less of an issue?
Problem lies in the fact that emergency certificates arise due to incipient personal harm to self or others. This person is extremely likely, right now, to hurt someone.
Having a single "psychiatric professional" stating a person may be a danger at some unspecified point in time/space just doesn't hold the same water.
Ciretose's assertion of "rubber stamp" signatures is also a scary (but true) facet of this.problem. If the people who are supposed to be the most impartial & fair in our society (judges) won't even read/evaluate such recommendations before enacting them, that's a serious flaw in the system.
TL;DR: one persons opinion on my future actions should not suffice to impinge on my rights.
|
Now that we can say with confidence that Holmes, Loughner and Cho were all flagged by professionals as being dangerous, and given the shooting at a Sikh by a known Neo-Nazi with criminal history, can we maybe work on getting the database to be updated and useful across state lines.
Holmes doctor literally went to police to warn them, risking her license, because she thought he was that dangerous 6 weeks before the shooting.
Before he bought some of the guns. So if we had a useful database we could have flagged him and alerted police that someone who was dangerously unstable according to a doctor was buying a gun.
Seriously. We can't agree to this?
And suddenly you have people governing others...irrespective of their consent.
.
I'm going to become a Psychiatric Professional and have you all banned,
because I'm smart enough to become a Psychiatric Professional and you
are not.
Once again it all comes down to social class, and who has the money to
get a higher educations, and become a Psychiatric Professional.
This is all just another way to Oppress the Lower Class(s).
.
|
|
Welcome to civilization. That's what we've been doing for the last 15,000 years. Probably earlier.And suddenly you have people governing others...irrespective of their consent.Now that we can say with confidence that Holmes, Loughner and Cho were all flagged by professionals as being dangerous, and given the shooting at a Sikh by a known Neo-Nazi with criminal history, can we maybe work on getting the database to be updated and useful across state lines.
Holmes doctor literally went to police to warn them, risking her license, because she thought he was that dangerous 6 weeks before the shooting.
Before he bought some of the guns. So if we had a useful database we could have flagged him and alerted police that someone who was dangerously unstable according to a doctor was buying a gun.
Seriously. We can't agree to this?
No..welcome to tyranny. Anyone can make a gun - you need a spark plug and a pipe and a ball bearing ans battery and some petrol soaked cotton wadding - and you have an electric musket.
Why should those prepared to resist tyranny through force of arms be required to be psychologically tested when those prepared to be tyrants are not?
Dingo, do you honestly think tyranny is such a pressing concern that resistance is the reason people arm themselves? I'm not arguing about what sort of arms the second amendment guarantees me the right to keep and bear; I'm saying I own more than one firearm and rebellion against a tyrant had nothing to do with my reasons.
... I'm saying I own more than one firearm and rebellion against a tyrant had nothing to do with my reasons.
.
Guns are sexy
.
Also why do they have to make you leave the mental hospital. What ever happened to be whatever you want in AMerica. Why can't I stay in a mental hospital the rest of my life if I wanted to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also why do they have to make you leave the mental hospital. What ever happened to be whatever you want in AMerica. Why can't I stay in a mental hospital the rest of my life if I wanted to.
.
Because I don't want my tax dollars paying for slackers to lay around
drooling into a bucket. Go Mittens!
.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also why do they have to make you leave the mental hospital. What ever happened to be whatever you want in AMerica. Why can't I stay in a mental hospital the rest of my life if I wanted to..
Because I don't want my tax dollars paying for slackers to lay around
drooling into a bucket. Go Mittens!.
Yet your tax dollars do a similar tihng of the person goes out and commits a crime and ends up in prision for life. So isn't this incentiveing crime.
Yet your tax dollars do a similar tihng of the person goes out and commits a crime and ends up in prision for life. So isn't this incentiveing crime.Also why do they have to make you leave the mental hospital. What ever happened to be whatever you want in AMerica. Why can't I stay in a mental hospital the rest of my life if I wanted to..
Because I don't want my tax dollars paying for slackers to lay around
drooling into a bucket. Go Mittens!.
.
The difference is we can put the prisoners to work; or ship them to
Australia.
.
So in Canada, if you ever want to own a hand gun, do not divorce someone on bad terms, as they can stop you from owning a gun.
I think the US could learn a lot from Canadian gun control.
I must reject this logic. Basing any law on the irrationality of angry ex-wives is bad business.
I think it might bring some sanctity back to marriage.
These 10 words will go down as the "most loaded 10 words in history"
Actually a licensed psychiatric clinician is by definition not a non-governmental segment of the population.
I'm a liscensed motor vehicle operator. That doesn't make me a government employee. It doesn't mean i was elected.
And drunk driving is generally a felony, so...
.. you take his keys. Not his guns, unless you're actively looking for an excuse to take away the guns because you don't like him.
This demonstrates why you can't give arbitrary power to decide to just one person. 1) No matter how well intentioned they're going to misuse it and 2) You don't always get someone well intentioned in the position of power.
As a society we take guns away from people for far less that the fact that they are so crazy a doctor reported them to the police.
AFTER they've been convicted, yes.
If we want to require a judge to sign off, I can tell you from my experience in the courts that will be an easy rubber stamp if any psychologist gives even an inkling of concern.
Yeah, that isn't making me feel better about the idea.
Add in an appeal process and let's make this so.
So you have to what.. prove you're innocent of something you've never done? Get the cash to hire an opposing psycologist to say that you're sane? Hire a lawyer to defend you against charges of what you might do in the future?
Its too easy and too pointless. If i want to go on a rampage i can get an illegal handgun faster and for about the same price as renewing my license.
I must reject this logic. Basing any law on the irrationality of angry ex-wives is bad business.So in Canada, if you ever want to own a hand gun, do not divorce someone on bad terms, as they can stop you from owning a gun.
I think the US could learn a lot from Canadian gun control.
.
I was recently in Toronto (which is in Canada) and the news of the day
was several murders by knife attacks.
People kill people. Limiting gun ownership is not going to stop that.
.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
People kill people. Limiting gun ownership is not going to stop that.
And vaccines don't stop diseases because people still die of disease.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... I'm saying I own more than one firearm and rebellion against a tyrant had nothing to do with my reasons..
Guns are sexy
.
Once again, very possibly the worst reason in the world to carry a gun.
Once again, very possibly the worst reason in the world to carry a gun.... I'm saying I own more than one firearm and rebellion against a tyrant had nothing to do with my reasons..
Guns are sexy
.
.
I see it in the movies all the time. Remember that Angelina Joelie movie ?
.
People kill people. Limiting gun ownership is not going to stop that.And vaccines don't stop diseases because people still die of disease.
.
We are all going to die; just don't be fat and stupid during your life.
> Steve Jobs Stanford Commencement Speech 2005 <
.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
