Looks like the tribbles^W chickens have come home to roost.
Sure, but there are a few differences. For one, a manned plane will have at least one person (the pilot) with a serious interest in it not being one of those that crashes and kills people. Even if his employer is willing to risk it, he has the final say and it's his ass on the line.
The little hobbyist craft are small and light weight, There is a serious limit to the amount of damage they might cause. Not so much for a 50 pound commercial drone.
The only hate in this discussion is held by people who don't want to treat others as normal human beings because their religion teaches them to despise others for being who they were born.
But you can twist it in to some sort of attack on "the right" if you wish - it only serves to make you look rather foolish and encouraging the very hate you pretend to not like.
So then you're in favor of skinheads and Westboro Baptist-style nutjobs forcing LGBT and ethnic owned bakeries to provide cakes with Nazi/KKK/skinhead themed cakes.
Be very careful what you wish for. A law forcing people to participate in, enable, and/or advocate for things they are fundamentally opposed to have historically demonstrated a nasty habit of being turned around and used against the very people who thought they were a great idea.
You're a special kind of stupid. The kind that enables tyranny.
Strat
The real test will be if the Disney+Abrams films live up to the originals, but the prequels have probably cast their immutable shadow over the entire franchise.
Fortunately, the Abrams 'Star Wars' time-travels into an alternate timeline where the prequels never existed, and Tatooine is destroyed by a rogue band of Ewoks.
Your examples need to be equivalent and the same thing: hate speech is not protected speech last time I checked.
"Hate speech" is a completely arbitrary, subjective, politically-driven, and constantly-changing standard, meaning it is no standard at all.
As I said above, bake them a cake, sure. But, to *force* a person under threat of deadly force to include symbols/symbolism, slogans, etc which convey support for or against any religious, ideological, political, or ethical subject/topic/party/etc to which they are fundamentally opposed is WRONG.
No matter the motive, it is wrong.
The next time there's some Bill or Proposition seeking to restrict rights of a protected class like LGBTs before a legislative body over which there is much contention, would it be OK for some anti-LGBT group to force an LGBT baker to provide them a cake with the graphic symbol being used to self-identify by that group? Like a swastika, maybe?
Sorry, you cannot force free people to participate in and/or advocate for things they fundamentally oppose. That's one of the reasons people came to colonize America, to escape exactly such tyranny by the churches and the monarchies of the Old World.
Only an ideological Luddite would want to turn history back and destroy basic pillars of individual liberty and freedom that so many have died for.
Strat
Yes, it is always unreasonable because it happens without the owner being found guilty in a court of law. In fact, it happens without any sort of due process.
Well, for starters, civil forfeiture is about your non-living stuff, and the 4th Amendment applies to YOU
By that logic, attaching a GPS-tracker to your car would not fall under the Amendment either.
No, the Amendment does not just cover your person, but also "houses, papers, and effects". How can those be taken away by a cop without not only a trial, but even a Judge-issues warrant, I do not know... It is just so glaringly unconstitutional, it boggles the mind.
And of course, our hopey-changey President insists on making a prosecutor, who made herself particularly infamous using such confiscations, into a new Attorney General...
Some of the ingredients, such as copper from the brass vessel, kill bacteria grown in a dish – but it was unknown if they would work on a real infection or how they would combine.
So they were trying to take it a step beyond 'killing bacteria grown in a dish.' They used it on mice skin (still not a human trial, of course).
Funny quote from the article:
Sourcing authentic ingredients was a major challenge, says Harrison. They had to hope for the best with the leeks and garlic because modern crop varieties are likely to be quite different to ancient ones – even those branded as heritage. For the wine they used an organic vintage from a historic English vineyard......Bullocks gall was easy, though, as cow's bile salts are sold as a supplement for people who have had their gall bladders removed.
IT isn't the "only" kind of failure. It is, however, the worst kind of failure. It isn't unreasonable to say "unknown failure rate" is enough to slow down deployment.
We warn the reader in advance that the proof presented here depends on a clever but highly unmotivated trick. -- Howard Anton, "Elementary Linear Algebra"
