or people could stop buying from tombstone vendors that are complete idiots. Some vendors are smart enough to buy a properly licensed object (of the gazillions out there) and embed it into the memorial. Problem solved.

Did you really think this is the first time someone wanted to do something like this? The parents just need to stop shopping at Billy Bob's Discount Tombstone & Tackle Shack if they want something atypical.

or people could stop buying DC Comic's shit for being the dicks they are since they could very well license it to them but are refusing. Of course, that will never fly because of asshats like you that can't see a parent's grief in their murdered child.

Talk to me about "licensing" when it is YOUR child.

And the insurance is the other way round. The named drivers get fully covered to drive the insured car, and they also get bare legal minimum insurance driving another car if they don't own it. But if somebody else drives the insured car, it is up to them to get insurance.

That is not true. If the driver is not the owner, but was authorized to drive the car by the owner, then the owner's insurance covers. It doesn't matter if the driver was named on the policy. If the driver drives without the owner's permission, then not only is it grand theft auto but it is considered uninsured. I know because I was hit by a driver in a stolen car where the thief ran away in all the confusion. Luckily I had full coverage and my insurance paid my medicals. Had I just had liability then I would be left holding the bills.

If you drive a car that is not covered by insurance, whether you have insurance on another car or not, it is still considered uninsured.

Having said all that, since automotive insurance is a state thing I suspect the laws governing the insurance varies by state. What I said above is correct for my state.

In his dissenting opinion, Justice Brennan wrote, "The most disturbing aspect of the Court's decision today is that it appears to give no weight to the citizen's interest in freedom from suspicionless investigatory seizures."

The same can be said of random drug tests.

I tend to agree with you but not to the paranoid extent you are taking it.

More to the point, I can see this being touted for home security (being able to enable / disable security systems from your phone, turn on and off lights, etc.) but that won't take off until they can guarantee the security of the Internet (which is something no company can do). As we all know, anything exposed to the Internet is just that... Exposed! To think it won't get exploited is putting your head in the sand.

Besides, for any of that stuff you don't need it exposed to the internet. Just a local network that blocks all devices that haven't been programmed into the router. That way when you lock yourself out of your house you can unlock the doors with your phone while you are standing outside. Who in their right mind would want to unlock their doors when they are on vacation?

As I have said before, I don't believe the US constitution applies outside the borders of this country for non-citizens... so it isn't the same level of constitutional crisis that we have here at home with a widespread, ongoing and wholesale violation of the fourth amendment threatening the very fabric of our society.,

Yet we have a whole war going on in Afghanistan by applying American laws on foreign citizens.

By your definition the US has no need of its extradition treaties since American laws don't apply to "non-citizens".

And in this case the US FISA court is telling the NSA it is OK to tell American corporations, on American soil, to violate the fourth amendment on their behalf and since it is in a secret National Security Letter, keep your mouth shut about it OR ELSE!

And you are willing to pay triple or quadruple in the store right?

I always see this kind of comment where people seem to think that cost won't be passed down to their wallet but the reality is you don't want the increased cost any more than the growers do. So why don't you put your money where your mouth is the next time prices jump and remember your comments above.

Let's correct a few things for you here...

We ignore the law

Correction... Businesses ignore the law when they hire the illegals. The state of Georgia implemented the strictest sanctions on employers of illegal immigrants and the end result was was a huge failure! ( http://www.forbes.com/sites/re... ). And where were the so called "American workers" to take up the slack? Well, let's just quote that article:

Despite high unemployment in the state, most Georgians don't want such back-breaking jobs, nor do they have the necessary skills. According to Dick Minor, president of the Georgia Fruit and Vegetable Grower's Association, immigrants "are pretty much professional harvesters" with many specializing in particular crops.

To even further disillusion you:

Georgia's experience is consistent with economic research on immigration. Although many Americans believe immigrants "steal" our jobs and push down our wages, economists find little evidence of that.

Immigration policy is designed to control the entry of immigrants, it's time we started treating that way.

They are trying to do that with modifications to a law that really, really needs fixing. The example of Georgia shows that isolation such as you are proposing doesn't work and in fact leads to economic harm. So exactly what would you propose? Would you work in the fields to enforce your vision when the immigrants all leave?

Although that is true, there are also many states that have laws on the books regarding police officers "moonlighting" since so many of them got caught double dipping claiming their police salary at the same time they were working their security stint. My state of WV is one such state because of the massive amounts of abuse like that going on. It got so bad in fact that there is legislation that was passed forbidding state police officers from moonlighting.

That would be Blackwater not Blackwatch...

There is just so many things wrong with this concept it is hard to know where to begin...

If they are private corporations, then where is their proof that they complied with the open bidding laws every state has to gain the contract for the SWAT services? Where is the contract that specifies the services to be rendered? Where is the contract that specifies the amounts to be paid for those services? Where is the assurances that they won't use state resources in providing those services? Since it is tax dollars paying for the services, where is the state audit trails required of all grants and contracts that ensures proper spending is occurring and that any over-runs or under-runs are not being exploited? If federal grant money is used, where is that audit trail and if the amount is over $25,000 where is the FFATA reports on the federal share spent as required by https://www.fsrs.gov/ ?

I am in state government and have to deal with these issues daily. By them saying they are private corporations, it throws them into the same category as any other private corporation having to contract for their services which kicks in so many laws it will make your head spin.

No plugin Auto-run for untrusted sites.

Well, you have 2 flaws right there. First, the verification method for "trusted sites" and second, the trust and verification of the trust authority. So you should have stopped at "no plugin auto-runs."

Or because the FAA holds the airplane manufacturers to an extremely high standard for their software.

Although that may be true, the FAA also requires all the backup systems to software driven indicators to be mechanical. So for example, the flight level indicator is duplicated as a mechanical instrument in case the electronic one fails. Same thing with the airspeed indicator, fuel gauges and other critical gauges. Especially if you are talking passenger aircraft. Many even have mechanical backups for hydraulic failures.

I honestly think that texting and cell phone bans are just using the "third brake light" effect.

I would agree with you IF the intention of those laws were truly about safety. They are not. It is all about revenue. In my state of WV the cell phone ban went into effect last year. It is a primary offense, meaning they can pull you over just for that, with fines starting at $200 for the first offense and increasing from there for subsequent offenses. And of course, like any other moving violation, your insurance rates will skyrocket after getting caught.

On a similar note, is there any state that doesn't require automotive insurance anymore? Or how about auto inspection stickers? I also see those as revenue generators for the police. They too also have a safety implication but when you look at the big picture they are more often used as a means of balancing budgets.

From TFS...

City officials released the data in response to a public records request and specifically obscured the drivers' hack license numbers and medallion numbers...

How many of you here have had to deal with a Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) request which is what a "public records request" is? I have had the pleasure over a dozen times. You have 10 days to respond to that request in my state. Some states it is even less. Failure to do so can result in stiff penalties. 10 days is hardly enough time to contract out to someone and have the job "done right".

It means you hire knowledge and experience, you hire expert skills, and those cost money.

And you are happy to have your taxes raised to pay those fees? Riiiight!

This is one of the many reasons I don't go anywhere near the ocean. It is a food chain out there and I don't need to be the weakest link.... GOODBYE!