This. I have yet to see a difference between her and Jack Thompson. Violence or misogyny which is it? Either way it is the same logic and evidence. Non-existent, cherry picked, lies andor self projection.
Driverless cars? A better feature proposition (it'd make the commute much easier and enjoyable), but the feature is limited to certain roads/speeds, and after seeing the price hikes for a hybrid, one can only imagine what the driverless feature set will cost you as someone out shopping for a new car.
I think you underestimate the potential demographic of drivers that only need limited access to roads and speeds. The elderly for one.
How many large demographics would jump at the opportunity for even "limited road access and limited speed "? My guess is large enough to be a descent success at the right price.
As for the costs, I am sure there is a point at which it is still profitable for Google and affordable to customers. Even if the first generation is a luxury item for wealthy andor semi-wealthy, prices will eventually come down. If Musk can do it with Tesla (assuming he accomplishes a 30k roadster) why can't Google do it for a driver-less car in a some odd years?
You may not "win" with your vote but it is definitely NOT throwing your vote away. Throwing your vote away would be not voting entirely which happens too often in the USA.
At least with a 3rd party vote, the growing disparity would at least signal to politicians that there is a larger (and growing) voting bloc that could be won. Or signals to the major parties that they are losing their support. Why should either politicians or the party's change if either A) most people do not vote or B) the people who do vote will vote for them regardless to ensure the other lizard doesn't win?
There is every reason in the world to vote. Just like there is a reason to vote for what you believe and not against what you are afraid of. Apathy is a bigger problem in the American voting system than first-past-the-post. (Even if the later may contribute to the former).
There is no middle ground because the phrase "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED" is pretty damn clear.
You must have missed the part where I said: "Gun law advocates never admit to the 2nd amendment".
And there is a middle ground, whether that has been muddied or not. Can buy a tank? An anti-aircraft shoulder launcher? Oh you mean that is only for militia? But I thought it says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms". What are arms? military grade equipment? Nuclear ICBM? If you got the money "Shall not be infringed" seems pretty inclusive.
Living in California
So, do you think CA is overstepping its rights to create those laws? What about other states? So much for state sovereignty, right? Are you shocked that a state has a different definition of "arms" than you? I agree with you, CA has some asinine laws but so do ALL states.
Just because American politics have become bastardized into the extremes of both political parties in all conversations, does not mean there is no middle ground that accommodates the spirit and letter of the 2nd amendment as well as the civilities and power we (individually) have as a post-modern society.
Just for clarification, I am a gun owner and gun rights supporter but even I can see that the debate has become drivel like most conversations in the US.
Can't find source it was a year back or so.
Boise might be down with it,
Maybe a small lead in the popular vote in the city limits. But the districts/sate legislators are very few and far between.
Currently, there is not a gun dealer in the U.S. willing to offer a smart gun for sale. A company called Armatix, based in Germany with an office in California, this year had two gun dealers — one in Maryland and one in California — ready to offer its
The company promoted the breakthrough, and the national media jumped on the news. As a result, the two gun-shop owners were thrust into the eye of a national storm. They caught overwhelming criticism from gun owners and Second Amendment proponents. Both backed down and decided not to sell the gun.
from the second link I posted..
Yes, the law in NJ is dumb. So, is the reaction from gun rights activists/NRA on smart guns as a whole.
. That's not a joke, either. You can walk down the street without a license carrying a loaded shotgun in each hand, handguns strapped all over your waist and legs, and rifles slung over your back, but nunchucks are illegal. We need to draw the line somewhere. This isn't the wild west any more.
http://www.motherjones.com/pol...
Any one sane doesn't like armed-to-the-teeth wanna-be vigilantes walking around with an axe to grind. They are being socially ostracized too.
It may not be the Wild West anymore but the culture it shaped still clings to "simpler times". When all a man needed was his horse and a gun to tame the Wild and make a life for his family, away from that meddlesome government.
I have hardly ever known a mathematician who was capable of reasoning. -- Plato
