I don't remember the word "personal" in the Second Amendment, but I do remember "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..." in the Declaration of Independence. That document claimed it as an intrinsic right of a people to throw off a government which no longer serves them.
I don't think a reasonable argument can be made against field artillery without at least addressing the Revolutionary War and whether or not it was justified or legal (i.e. via unalienable rights which trump lesser government laws against treason and rebellion). It is much harder to throw off a government without the ability to match its military capability. Regulation of arms (or militias) is a separate issue, but I think relegating the Second Amendment to only personal defense or hunting game without considering (modern) arms necessary to resist a depraved government's (modern) military would be an unwarranted assumption fallacy.
You get the 12 mile military and 200 mile fishing limits for your land per international law. However, this must be land above the water. You cannot find land under the surface, dump tons of dirt on it, and claim those rights, per same law.
This doesn't mean you can't create the islands, but you can't do the 12 mile/200 mile thing. China [a nuclear power with a massive army and permanent UN veto]
So how many of you know that Slashdot is up for sale? It's been on the firehose and elsewhere on the web all morning, but, as near as I can tell, not on the Slashdot front page? Is Slashdot ownership not news for nerds or stuff that matters anymore?
Oh, and way to go USA on finally getting around to answering that petition... Nice to see such a quick, open, and transparent response to the citizenry. At least this one is honest.
I agree. Which OU had control of the space? Where's the dirt? Is even there a single decent paparazzo left in science reporting?
I give kudos to the selection of the "special projects" building though*. Nothing like a remote corner of campus with sloped earthwork embankments around all the lab windows for doing something like this. Do you realize how much of a success this indicates for NIST's culture of safety (which they've been working hard on ever since that little Pu oops in Boulder)? Even their alleged illicit activity takes safety into consideration (although the explosion indicates the potential perp. missed something in the hazard analysis - but hey, what do you expect from criminals).
*For those that don't know, that was a politically clever rename of the hazards building, similar to how they also came up with the Center for Neutron Research name.
I'm sure it wouldn't be the first time an author called a journal editor (or reviewer) nasty names based on received comments.
Hmm... I wonder if the AC would have said the same thing if shortscruffydave had called out a syntax error in C; you know, nothing code breaking, just sloppy editing.
The Tao doesn't take sides; it gives birth to both wins and losses. The Guru doesn't take sides; she welcomes both hackers and lusers.