Don't forget, Hari Seldon's solution included the reduction of 10,000 years of barbarism to 1,000. I started counting at 2000. Only 990 years to go!
"When the White House releases his budget proposal Monday, there will be no money for the Constellation program that was supposed to return humans to the moon by 2020. The troubled and expensive Ares I rocket that was to replace the space shuttle to ferry humans to space will be gone, along with money for its bigger brother, the Ares V cargo rocket that was to launch the fuel and supplies needed to take humans back to the moon. There will be no lunar landers, no moon bases, no Constellation program at all."
Link to Original Source
Stolen from a great post above, but see below. As Justice Stevens points out in his dissenting argument, the answer is a resounding "Yes".
But [Justice] Stevens and the dissenters said the majority was ignoring the long-understood rule that the government could limit election money from corporations, unions and others, such as foreign governments. "Under today's decision, multinational corporations controlled by foreign governments" would have the same rights as Americans to spend money to tilt U.S. elections. "Corporations are not human beings. They can't vote and can't run for office," Stevens said, and should be subject to restrictions under the election laws.
"Buddhism is atheistic"
Technically, Buddhism is non-theistic. God or gods may or may not exist, but the question is ultimately irrelevant because attachment is the cause of samsara.
Maybe in your snide haze, you missed the fact that those restrictive laws had virtually no effect on gun violence. Chicago's gun laws have been on the books since the early 80's and we just had one of the deadliest summers in a decade due to gun violence. Just like the War on Drugs, let's keep doing the same thing even though it's proven not to work. I agree with one of the other grandchildren posts in this thread: societal causes lead to violence, not guns. Given that over half of households in the country have at least one firearm in the house but deaths due to guns totaled only 16,000 or so, the prevalence of guns is obviously not the problem. Australia is a entirely different society and gun ownership was not ingrained in their history as deeply as ours, so stop comparing apples and oranges. I'm comparing American cities that have vastly different gun laws and vastly different rates of gun violence.
But I love how people how don't own guns immediately blame the tool instead of the perpetrator. Proper respect for guns comes from use. Most people who do not own guns have never held one, to say nothing of actually ever shooting one. They typically react uncomfortably, if not with outright alarm, when in their presence. All they know of firearms they learn from TV and movies. They never acknowledge these prejudices when it comes to discussion about gun laws. To quote a saying I've seen over the years, it's as if the illiterate were dictating what you can and cannot read.
I must be completely out of my head then, because I'm a self-described "liberal" who strongly supports the 2nd Amendment. I own a gun, precisely because Illinois (and Chicago in particular) have much stricter gun laws than the rest of the country. Coincidentally, we have higher murder rates and crimes in which a gun is used than the rest of the country too. The city with the highest murder rate (typically by firearms) is Washington D.C., which has a total ban on any firearms ownership. Seeing a trend?
And btw, martial arts as self-defense against a firearm is only realistic in the movies.