They can be used to make art in the snow. They can be used to make loud noise music. They can even be used to open stubborn locks! Guns have many purposes. Buy yours today!
Get one free gun with purchase of large bottle of prozac! Low taxes thanks to cuts in mental health care!
I find it interesting that the states think there is no need for gun regulation but then they have a war on drugs.
Guns don't kill people, it's how people use the guns.
Drugs don't kill people, it's how people use the drugs.
Drug laws don't prevent people from having drugs, so I guess we shouldn't regulate any drugs whatsoever right?
Look at per capita gun related homicides in Canada vs the US.
My worksite has "Attendance Management." That means if you are sick more than the average of all employees by even a fraction, you can be terminated. Understandably, the average only ever goes down. More people work sick.
That's for the full time work force.
The auxiliary work force like me don't get sick days so we all work sick because we can't afford the time off.
so much lol
Aw so now the UK censors speech based on the speaker, rather than the speech.
I would define "knowing" as the the robot kills the wrong target, and then it takes active steps to evade it's creators so that it won't be taken offline. Such as networking with other killer robots to destroy everything.
And then they run experiments on humans to either produce robots that look a lot like people or to network people into a giant simulation to somehow use them as batteries (because apparently humans are net producers of energy).
It sounds so callous when you put it like that.
"I'd like to buy two wars please."
"I'm sorry, sir, but it looks like you only have enough money for one."
"Aww fine. I'll put the other one on my Christmas wishlist."
Just look at Wall Street! They sure learned you can't route around the law.
I don't know. Why would a company want to hire someone who cares more about their own interests than the company's interests? Only when the two interests happen to coincide does the company win.
My feeling is that in the UN, each country should get a number of votes based on the proportion of free people in the population that has real say in said country's government (based on some standard set of checks, but mostly based on whether they can vote in honest elections). In a government like China, that would mean they would only get a tiny fraction of a vote, based on the small minority of high ranking government officials who get to choose how China actually operates. The same would be true in countries like Iran that hold mostly fraudulent elections.
Well established verifiable democracies would have a lot more influence in the UN than dictatorships.
The best part is that countries like China can't realistically complain about not having a voice proportional to their people when they can't truly say they represent those people. If they want a democratic say in how the planet is run, then they have to offer that same right to the people in their country.
Amen brother. Gotta love strawmen arguments.
"Let's do away with political correctness and multiculturalism and all that shit because my tortured definition of it is so flawed."
I guess that's why there are so few civilian casualties for drone strikes, right?
I just wish they'd pay me $1 billion to tell them something's not going to work out. Plus I bet I could do it in half the time.
The following statement is not true. The previous statement is true.
