Anything plastic on a car is already competing with free, zip tie, or bondo for repairs.

Since the only time this happened to me I got a script answer about how they would fix it just this once, I've wondered could I do a credit card challenge if Amazon refused to refund. Essentially, to me the consumer, Amazon is charging my card without authorization. Since Amazon refuses to resolve the situation after the first occurance, isn't that grounds for me to pursue it with my card company or did I sign that right away in a EULA somewhere?

It would be nice if we were a bit progressive and as a planet got ahead of the clear human abuses that typically come with our historic examples of frontiers.

Oh for some mod points.

However it seems a technically accurate term.

There have been two shark attacks in the past 50 years at the nearest beach to me both non-fatal. They still will close the water if there is an observed abundance of sharks. From what I've heard from people who have flown over the area, large sharks close to swimmers is a typical occurance. I can't imagine what it would be like to try to plan a trip to the beach if the authorities had one of these devices.

IT, at least if you listen to the media and the politicians, is currently one of the most important industries that the US has. While it may come down to preference, we don't want to have a culture that in some way discourages people who haven't historically had opportunity from one of the healthiest sectors of the economy. We have some pretty strong statistics that say something is going on here and that something is going on from middle school to end of career. What this means is we need to find out what is happening because we may be failing at even conservative ideas of equality: equal opportunity.

Because if they can make it illegal to view their content on a computer they can go back to the more controllable form of print media.

I've always done best in the stock market when I'm choosing companies that are clearly operating outside the common good.

So what about those of us who refuse a smartphone for various reasons? I wouldn't mind having one but I'm not going to shell out another $20/month for internet on a device that I mainly use in a place where I already pay for the internet.

Both sides want to keep more people alive and they are firmly convinced the other side's opinion on how to do that will fail miserably. My parents live in a relatively quiet neighborhood but there was an incident where three unarmed teenagers beat an elderly man to death for money and medication. They were strongly resistant to even toy guns in the house but now they own one because they simply would be overcome if anyone broke in. Gun deaths would drop without guns and maybe even overall deaths, but your position makes the elderly, the female, the weak far more tempting targets than the strong young men you think of as gun nuts. That to me is unconscienable unless you are severely reducing overall violence and that doesn't seem to follow the worldwide stats.

While we generally equate or elevate rape above death, I was going for an apples to apples comparison. But yeah. Wives, elderly, infirm. Rape. Assault....

That is a rather strange presumption that something that would cause enough unrest to cause the gun owning segment of the US population to revolt would leave the military intact. If normal firearms are worthless in battle then why does the government keep spending my tax money to make sure our soldiers have them?

Why does my right not to be shot in the face trump my right not to be beaten to death by an overwhelming group or physical specimen or not to be stabbed to death by a guy in a dark parking lot or tied down and beaten to death in my home?

Broken or not, poverty safety nets are generally a crime offset. We'll have to replace what we remove.