I'm going to call bullshit. Read about how the police in CT were deciding what to do, while two criminals rapped and murder a mom along with two daughters before burning them alive. But the cops did get the criminals as the ran from the house, so I guess that counts for ... nothing, they are dead and died in a horrible way, the only person more victimized was the father/husband who survived his beatings but lost everyone he loved.

Read about how the cops took people's guns after Katrina and how gang members came around after the cops robbing them once they were defenseless.

I carry a concealed handgun, I have handguns accessible in several areas of my home and cars. The reason is simple, I don't ever wish to be a victim. I am not going to be dependent on somebody coming to save me. I have many friends who are cops or retired cops and they are very open about their response times being 15+ minutes versus the time it takes the average criminal to secure a home during a break in, which, is less than 3 minutes. They are upfront about how they are not legally responsible for stopping a rap or an assault, because in most cases they arrive after the crime has been committed. If you are a freeman and understand you have a right to exist, then you will have no problem carrying a gun, nor should anyone else around you who respects the concept of freedom. The only people that need to worry about a well armed free society are bullies, thugs, criminals, gangs and potential government dictators.

So do you think it is appropriate for government employees to have these guns?

Here is my point, I do not want the government to have a monopoly on the use of force. The 2nd amendment is part of the contract between the governed and the government of the United States. The only legal way it can be changed is to renegotiate the contract with the people; until that time nobody should infringe on the rights of others to own guns.

Do you not understand the word infringe? Do you not understand the 2nd amendment has a preamble? Do you not understand the conditions and consent of the governed in the social contract? Just because you may not like it doesn't change the fact that it is the law of the land.

Stop being such a bigot and open your mind ... man.

Apple has had it's share of security mistakes. Apple has ignored reported security flaws for months and in some cases for over a year. They just hide their shortcomings better.

http://www.yuengling.com/

Are you aware that you can actually push pages to your phone via Chrome Phone Extension? And of course sync bookmarks?

Did you know that with FireFox 4+ on your desktop and your phone that you can browse not just synced bookmarks, but also browse the currently open tabs one the other device and open those tabs? This feature is great for those days when you read half a /. story, realize you are late for client appointment, rush to get onsite (having to skip morning dump to save time). Finally once onsite, you not only get to take a billable dump, but you get to finish your web article where you left off.

Personally, the best part of being a consultant is billable dumps, but the best part of billable dumps is reading the Internet from the spot you last left it, while fighting a corn turtle.

The reason TX has so much power when it comes to textbooks is that TX isn't in debt. CA and NY are big markets, but since they are so broke, they cannot afford to pay to have textbooks written. So you make a strong case for why governments shouldn't carry large debts more than anything else. Finally the biggest thing pulling TX schools down is a huge percentage of students who's primary language is not English. A cost effect way to improve Texas schools is simply to allow states to not educate illegal aliens.

You obvious don't understand the key point about lemmings

Funny because I use the word lemming to describe people who blindly following what others say and do. For example people who follow without question, the hypothesis that global warming is man-made and CO2 is responsible tend to be lemmings.

Perhaps a better term would be CO2 Bigots, because despite the scientifically proven fact that H2O in the atmosphere is a more significant green house gas than C02, these Bio-blivious types continue to call for CO2 cuts, while making excuses for clouds (I suspect this is because clouds are white). Maybe the simplist thing for us to do is refer to them as GASists while pointing out all their flawed, faked and poorly done research in the area of GW; highlighting that nearly every conclusion derived requires people to give up their quality and way of life.

I look at everything GW parrots say, how they are in the process of attempting to re-brand it as "climate change", for which a reasonable person would say "Like the seasons dumbass?". Look at how GW lemmings ignore the fact that we could cover the entire planet with solar panels and not have enough energy, how public transportation buses with a driver and 2 passengers is less efficient than a Tahoe with 2 people, yet public transportation (which the GW elitist will never use) is the cliff they prefer to jump off of. Point out people should make one trip to Wal-Mart instead of seven trips to independent co-ops and GW fascists will flip their lid, because that isn't their master plan for humanity. Finally if you really want to have fun, ask GW robots something they are not programmed to answer (or comprehend), ask them what the correct temperature should be for the location and place you are in, explain how they should know the answer for two reasons, first so we can measure how close we are to their cliff (I mean goal) and second so we can ensure we don't go to far and cause man-made global cooling.

Furthermore, the 10th amendment prevents the Federal Government from being allowed to interfere with the state and local governments in this way.

Yeah, that whole 4th amendment thing is just crazy at how it prevents the government from looking through my credit card statement and personal property without court issued search warrant. Along with that equally insane 5th amendment thing that prevents me from being required to disclose or testify against myself as to where I buy my PJs and comic books. Course I don't even need to say if I even have PJs or comic books. ;)

For the federal government to collect VAT or sales taxes it would need to amend (or pervert) the Constitution, currently feds are limited to excise and income taxes only. Again Constitution and fact that I can assure state and individual uprisings if the federal government tried.

Personally I would be open to a sales tax (only at the retail level, not a VAT of any kind) provided the amendment that authorized a sales tax also nullified the 16th amendment and required a uniform percentage across all retail goods (not services) that was set by the majority of states, not the federal government.

FYI: The Constitution doesn't allow the Federal government to collect a value added tax of any kind. Also the law as you present it violates the 10th Amendment in various ways as well as many other provisions of Constitution. Just the fact they you put the Constitution in lower case speaks volumes.

"Why do things differ so much from State to State?" Because we are a Republic of independent states and that is how our Constitution was setup to promote a limited ans restricted federal government and to promote individual and state rights. Course many of out federally elected politicians don't seem to understand this, which, is why the Tea Party has been so effective at knocking those career politicians out of office.

From your comment I can assume that you have never actually spoken with the average state employee?

Dude that is so old school. These days you don't need firemen to burn unwanted books/ideas. In a world of electric books on multi-media devices there are two far simpler options:

• You run code to remove electronic copies/versions of unwanted ideas whenever they are found on the network
• You produce large quantities of reality TV, trash novels and other "noise" to drown out unwanted ideas

Libraries should simply buy paper books instead of ebooks while this policy is in place.

Please explain how Author --> Publisher --> Apple --> Amazon --> Reader removed the middleman from what was Amazon's current models of either:

Author --> Publisher --> Amazon --> Reader

or

Author --> Amazon --> Author's mom.

How exactly are book sales going to kick an additional percentage to Apple and be cheaper? Do you honestly believe that if Barnes and Noble and Amazon were not alternative shops for eBooks that Apple would have lower eBook prices, when it was Apple that allowed publishers to force Amazon and BN to raise their ebook prices several months back?