Funny people complain about too much regulatory powers when it comes to cows, but ignore the neglectful lact of regulation in banks, campaign finance, environmental pollution, even food and medicine, etc, when assessing the power of our beauracracy. If an oil company had asked for this land, they'd have gotten it in a heartbeat, but this guy wasn't donating to the right politicians. It has nothing to do with regulatory overreach.

Regulation aside, it gave the guy an unfair advantage over competitors, a concept that should strike dear to the hearts of libertarians. Not every rancher is positioned next to gov't land they can 'borrow.' Did he even offer to buy the land?

For one, Slashdot has a bunch of anti-social jerks that like to post, who have an inability to empathize with anyone else. So no surprise they think something like that is a good idea, because they they aren't very reasonable people.

However others have pointed out, accurately I think, that something like this can well be a cause for it. The thing is that if you push someone in to a corner and give them what seems to be no way out, no way to fight back, they may go nuts. Happens with other animals, not just humans. So if you have a kid that is continually picked on, who tries to stand up for themselves, but is then picked on even worse, this time by law enforcement, well then they may well take drastic measures because they feel like there's no option, no hope.

I think there is some real merit to this. Not merit as in saying it is good that kids do it, but that it is correct that actions like this can lead to kids doing it. If they feel they have nothing to lose and nowhere to turn, then a completely crazy overreaction may be the only option they feel they have.

I mean here you have a case of a kid who did everything right, and got increasingly screwed: He never fought back or defended himself, which schools do not allow (you can argue if they should, but they don't, it is against the rules). He got no help or support from the school, I mean it was allowed to happen IN CLASS in front of a teacher. He told his parents, they were skeptical, he produced evidence. He was then threatened by the police, ordered to delete it (illegally), drug to court, etc, etc. So what has he got now? He's been effectively told the bullies are allowed to do as they wish and if you attempt to stop them the police and courts will punish you.

So what's he to do? You can see how a drastic, illogical, action might be what he thinks is his only option. Remember that he doesn't have the perspective of age, he can't look on high school and say "Ya that's a real short time in your life and it gets WAY better once you are out and an adult." To him, this is his whole world. And for that matter, the adult world has stepped in and told him he;s wrong to try and make things better for himself.

As such you can see why people are saying it can lead to something like a school shooting. It is something that administrators need to consider: Dealing with bullying isn't something to do just because it is the right thing (which would be a good enough reason) but it is a safety issue as well.

That law is stupid. In my state, if one person is threatening another person, it takes only one-party consent, e.g., the person who is being threatened can give consent. Silently of course.

This situation should spark the PA Legislature to amend the law.

More than that, in Cold Fjordistan, everything is true, especially the lies.

Nobody cared about Iraq the second time until the Oligarchs got in their head it would be profitable for them and then lied to get that profit.

But then you're Cold Fjord -- fascist statist NSA lover. No Federal evil is too small for you to love, but bigger is always better isn't it?

No, it doesn't. Velikovsky theorized that Venus was ejected from Jupiter. We have no good theories for how or why a gas giant would spontaneously produce and then eject a smaller terrestrial planet, not to mention no physical evidence that i've seen that it has ever actually happened.

What is going on here is that some of the material in Saturn's rings has accreted together into a moonlet. It's already been theorized that that's how at least some of Saturn's other 100+ moonlets were formed. The only reason that this is at all a surprise is that A: there's still enough material left in the rings after forming all the other moonlets and B: that we're caught it in the middle of the process . And as for (B), i haven't seen any estimates of how long it's been going on, but i suspect that it's been taking place slowly over millions of years, and we're only seeing it now because we've finally gotten sensitive enough instruments in the right position to detect it.

If so then in one case we have a tiny moon, one of over 100, being formed by a known method over a period of millions of years. And in the other case we have the 2nd largest terrestrial planet, one of just 8 planets total, being formed by an entirely unknown method over the period of a couple thousand years.

The first case provides absolutely no support for the second case.

As for "Hot Venus", that doesn't really provide any evidence for Velikovsky unless you don't believe the greenhouse effect exists.

And i don't know what radio signals from Jupiter have to do with Velikovsky's theories of planetary formation, so i can't really address that.

Oh sure, they're _interesting_. But lots of people make interesting predictions from random theories that aren't based on any solid evidence. Some of those people we call science fiction and fantasy authors, and others we call crackpots, depending on whether they think their "interesting predictions" are actually the truth or just a form of entertainment.

One of the problems with advanced weapons systems is they require a bunch of effort and facilities to produce, maintain, and use. So while they are fearsome, they are vulnerable to a large force that takes over their support structures.

For example while the US's combat planes are the most amazing the world has ever known, they only work when they have secure airfields to operate from. If those get taken over, they are in a world of shit. Which is why they have security but that security is men with guns. The planes can't defend their own airfields, for many reasons.

If you want to see it on a small scale, well ask yourself why the US has been unable to secure Afghanistan or Iraq. They had considerably more forces than your silly "1 aircraft carrier" scenario, it was hardly the whole population fighting, yet after years and years, they have been unable to secure the countries.

Lots of people with small arms are a force all of their own.

Never heard of an abacus?

p.s. the current win 8 experience has both testicles being torn from your body, or so my father said when he received a win 8 machine as an x-mas gift..

BTW

Seriously?

Idiot, he was referring to the documentary about the asteroid that they blew up with the nuke. You know, when Daredevil makes out with Arwen.

dumb bosses made me use a win 7 machine.

Saying "Vista was ok" is like saying "Ok, one of my testicles was torn from my body, but otherwise it was a good experience"...

I'm guessing the investors expect Amazon to become and stay the Walmart of the internet (or perhaps the Sears and Roebuck from catalog days) and be be able to either ramp up margins or pay them at that level for a LONG time.

Jesus -- I haven't done acid since my college days a quarter century ago. You should lay off it.

Big Lie -- you're whole post is this. You try to take on the mantle of a freedom loving defender of American virtue, when the fucking straight fact is, you are the biggest NSA shill there is, and the NSA is one of the biggest threats to the US Constitution in the entire world. We also have other Executive branch things that are pretty fucking bad, but the NSA is anti-constitution, thus anti-American, and your support for the NSA makes YOU anti-American.

IIRC, the standard deduction this year was $6900 for single payers. Pretty easy to top that via mortgage interest.

Fellow MD resident?