Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Sick Society (Score 1) 253

Divide 40 000 by 300 000 000 and you have a proof (in your mindset) that there is no link between boobs and breast cancer.

If you want to take this stupid analogy to its logical conclusion you'd have to suggest mandatory mastectomies to save those 40,000 souls. Granted, you'll be punishing 99.987% of women, but you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, eh?

Comment Re:Sick Society (Score 1) 253

Basically, it is cherry-picking by various ambiguous qualifiers: "stable", "developed", etc. Usually these are just keywords for "..as compared primarily to the UK, Western Europe, and Canada.."

It's a dog-whistle for the obviously racist intent of "majority white". That's what they mean, that's what they're saying, they just lack the guts to be explicit with it.

LK

Comment Re:Sick Society (Score 5, Interesting) 253

As long as the NRA and RWNJ refuse to acknowledge that we have a gun problem, not a people problem, the deaths will continue and there will be nothing to stop it.

~300,000,000 guns, ~100,000,000 gun owners, with about ~14,000 annual homicides committed with firearms. Rhetorical question: What's 14,000 divided by 100,000,000 or 300,000,000?

It is a people problem. Studies have shown that the vast majority of first time murders already had extensive violent criminal records. Clearly the justice system is not doing these people or society justice, since there were ample opportunities to intervene before they took a human life.

It's also a socioeconomic problem, because crime is driven in large part by poverty. You want to cut gun violence? End the war on drugs, increase education and job placement funding, and start to look at seriously reforming our mental healthcare system.

Of course, all of those things are hard to do. It's a lot easier if you can just blame the guns, as though inanimate objects are possessed of powers of their own.

Comment Re:Who watches the watchers (Score 1) 243

You're claiming that Reynolds v. Sims was a bad decision?

Yes, it was, because it allows the urban parts of the country to dictate policy to the rural parts. It removed a critical check against the tyranny of the majority. It has lead to three generations of rural disillusionment and resentment that has now reached the point where there are mainstream secessionist movements (because Reynolds v. Sims couldn't touch the structure of the United States Senate, just the State level upper houses) in several States.

Your perspective would probably be different if you lived in any part of New York outside of New York City, or Western Massachusetts, or Southern Illinois, or rural California, blah, blah, blah.

f you want to argue against it, please explain on what grounds you believe it to be a problem, and why what you would replace it with would not be worse.

Explain to me why it's acceptable for the United States Senate to be allocated based on geography instead of population, but not for the New York State Senate to be similarly allocated? What would be so horrible about creating a State Senate that granted each County two Senators while retaining the population based Assembly?

Comment Re:Who watches the watchers (Score 1, Informative) 243

The 17th Amendment began the process of destroying the Federal structure of the United States, empowering the Federal Government to expand into areas that were previously the sole province of the States, expansions that would have been resisted if the State Legislatures still had direct representation in Washington. Centralization of power comes with all manner of negative consequences, ranging from the ease with which well monied interests can exploit the process to the tyranny of the majority over the minority.

Slashdot Top Deals

He who steps on others to reach the top has good balance.

Working...