The Content of their Character
1 hour ago
For example, here's Milius on stopping murderous drug traffickers in Mexico: "We need to go down there, kill them all, flatten the place with bulldozers so when you wake up in the morning, there's nothing there," he said in a phone interview. "I do believe if you have a military, you use it."My personal favorite: [Conan! What is best in life?] "To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you and to hear the lamentations of their women." [That is good!]
"There's no shame in the world, and without shame, you cannot have honor. Our world is ruled by consensus now. There is no sense of honor."CNN also had an article with the top 10 movie lines, according to them. Actually, the article was interesting because it mentions the propensity of recent generations to quote movie dialogue. At least I'm not alone.
I'm sure you've already heard from a number of gun owners regarding the your article "Gun-Control Calls Are Renewed" in the March 13th edition of The Wall Street Journal. As a WSJ reader and a participant in the so-called "gun culture," I similarly felt that I should point out a few things, and correct where necessary.Relevant links:
First of all, I think the WSJ is an exceptional publication. However, it still tends to not report on firearm-related topics in an entirely neutral fashion. Case in point, this article made mention of the expired "Assault Weapons Ban" in connection with the shooting incident, leading the reader to conclude that a renewed AWB should follow. There wasn't much of a counter-argument presented, which was highly unfortunate.
The use of the term "semi-automatic assault rifle" is an oxymoron. "Assault rifle" has a specific definition, being a selective-fire rifle with detachable magazine that uses an intermediate cartridge between handgun rounds, which would be termed a "submachine gun," and full-fledged battle rifle rounds. Examples: Submachine gun - H&K MP5, IMI Uzi, Auto-Ordinance Thompson; assault rifle - Colt M16/M4, AK-47; battle rifle - M14, H&K G3, FN FAL. You meant to use "semi-automatic assault weapon," which is a political term used in legislation such as the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (HR 3355, Sec. 110102) and has no meaning in weapons technology.
As already corrected in the online version of the article, "unlicensed dealer" is a misnomer. (Though it reminds me of the pithy remark, "Calling an illegal alien an 'undocumented immigrant' is like calling a drug dealer an 'unlicensed pharmacist'.") The Gun Control Act of 1968 established the requirements of the current Federal Firearms License (FFL) system, requiring persons dealing in weapons for business obtain a license. Not doing so brings down the wrath of the ATF on one's head, which usually leads to imprisonment or death. Malum prohibitum, indeed. You meant "private sellers," not the politically charged and biased phrase used. Legally, I could sell any gun in my collection, since it doesn't (yet) include NFA weapons, to anyone not prohibited by law from possessing firearms, whether at a gun show or in a grocery store parking lot. (There are a few wrinkles in that, such as selling across state boundaries, and state laws mandating certain conditions for transfers.) The point is that "dealers" aim to make a profit, and such sales of firearms require a license.
Lastly, the article contained this statement: "Whether the expired federal law would have banned the particular semiautomatic assault rifles that Mr. McLendon is alleged to have used is unclear." This is in error. The text of the expired AWB specifically names the Colt AR-15 and clones. The typical SKS configuration is also banned, as it usually includes a detachable box magazine, bayonet, and grenade launcher mount. (SKSes with internal magazines are not affected.) However, regardless whether the AWB was in effect or not, transfer of affected items existing at the time of the ban was still legal. Such legislation simply makes guns more expensive, which is discrimination against low income individuals, who probably live in areas where they need weapons the most. Subsequent proposed AWB legislation specifically names the SKS in the ban list.
I find the mere prospect of a renewed AWB to be disgusting. Other than such legislation is in direct conflict with the Constitution, why truncate others' freedoms just because a few people can't handle it? Apparently, arrogance -- in certain legislators and their supporters presuming to know what's best for everybody -- knows no bounds.
"Do you think the gun control issue is taken seriously enough?"I guess I have to keep reading their site to note their factual and intellectual abuses.
In the U.S., gun control is out of control, and is being taken more seriously than it should. Knee-jerk reactions to incidents never produce good results, especially since gun control legislation is motivated by fear.
Germany has tougher gun laws than the U.S., and obviously it doesn't help. What more do you want, a police state?! Furthermore, criminals will just ignore any new gun laws and obtain weapons illegally. Logically, gun control legislation just doesn't make sense. Citizens of intellect repudiate it.
Normally one's medical records are confidential. However, when applying for insurance, one signs a waiver that allows the insurance company to access your records. So if the doctor makes a note of it, someone else may see it. Normally your information is confidential unless you voluntarily give away access or "the law" wants to know by issuing a subpoena.
This is one reason why the notion of setting up a system for sharing medical records electronically is a bad idea -- that makes it easier for your private information to get spread around. It's one thing if the insurance company has to actually call up your family doctor's office. Electronic data tends to get copied, leaked, and hacked.
Even better said than Mr. Kaushik, who must be from an era gone by. As for the metaphor (well, this commentary is over-analysis for sure), my generation was well-steeped in "pr0n", and I think pretty much everyone who was inclined to do it knew how. Of course, Mr. Kaushik meant "no one knows how to do it right" -- the efforts we see are stab-in-the-dark attempts to gain experience to do it right.
That "everyone claims to be an expert" seems to represent well the typical American characteristic of thinking too highly of their ability to get things done, hence much of the overconfidence and hype. (Disclaimer: I'm American, and while I eschew egotistic behavior, I imagine I'm guilty of it from time to time.) Conversely, my experience in the said metaphor wasn't that it was sub-par relative to expectations, but rather that everything else that went along with the relationship was hard to deal with. For me, social media is similar: the cost of the desired result in work involved isn't a good tradeoff.
Depending on one's temperament, it may be better to pass over quick gratification for a more mature "user experience" a couple years down the road that may be less emotionally scarring ;-)